Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine

Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: sirlordbaltimore on January 06, 2016, 01:27:11 PM

Title: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sirlordbaltimore on January 06, 2016, 01:27:11 PM

This thing came up over the summer and around the time Tim got the boot. The general consensus being he as the manager didn't want all the players we brought in, and according to the crab Wilkins, it was probably near half and half in terms of acquisitions made (or suggested) by the board and manager himself. Collymore's also had a bee in his bonnet of late about it, despite it surely happening at a lot of other clubs as well as ours.

Anyway, looking at the summer signings who do we put them down to ? for me (and it's purely guess work) i reckon the board have done the better business

Ayew - board
Amavi - board
Veretout - board
Traore - board
Gueye - board
Gestede - Tim
Sinclair - deal agreed before Tim arrived
Lescott - Tim
Crespo - god knows
Ilori - Tim
Bunn - Tim
Richards - Tim
Sarkic - board

Just guesses of course

Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 06, 2016, 01:56:27 PM
Didn't Reilly take Ilori to Liverpool in the first place?

If so I think it's a safe bet he was the driving force on that one.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Duncan Shaw on January 06, 2016, 02:12:58 PM
I think Traore was Tim, just he was a lot more effusive about it than the others when it happened, things like "I've been watching him for a couple of years"
I don't think he'd have signed Sinclair either if he had a choice.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Stirchley Villain on January 06, 2016, 02:26:00 PM

This thing came up over the summer and around the time Tim got the boot. The general consensus being he as the manager didn't want all the players we brought in, and according to the crab Wilkins, it was probably near half and half in terms of acquisitions made (or suggested) by the board and manager himself. Collymore's also had a bee in his bonnet of late about it, despite it surely happening at a lot of other clubs as well as ours.

Anyway, looking at the summer signings who do we put them down to ? for me (and it's purely guess work) i reckon the board have done the better business

Ayew - board -Good
Amavi - board - Potential
Veretout - board- Potential
Traore - board - Potential
Gueye - board - Potential
Gestede - Tim -Shit
Sinclair - deal agreed before Tim arrived - Shit
Lescott - Tim - Shit
Crespo - God knows - shit
Ilori - Tim- ?
Bunn - Tim - below average
Richards - Tim - shit
Sarkic - board -?

Just guesses of course

My two pen'orth. For what it's worth.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: postal on January 06, 2016, 02:38:03 PM
Other than getting the goal that got the single win, Gestede has been one of the worst players I've seen for a long time. I dont care how "good" he is in the air, he just can't kick a ball. Surely that should be something all players should be able to do? His awareness is poor and considering how tall he is, he should be able to have a wider range of vision. His one saving grace is he knows what the Championship is like.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: cheltenhamlion on January 06, 2016, 03:06:33 PM
Gestede, Richards and Lescott are the ones Sherwood really pushed for
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: nigel on January 06, 2016, 04:47:00 PM
If those guesses are correct then the board have much better judgment than Tim.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: cheltenhamlion on January 06, 2016, 05:39:31 PM
He really wanted Townshend, Lennon and Adebayor as well.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: ozzjim on January 06, 2016, 05:51:37 PM
This is one of the things that annoys me about the laziness of journalists and some fans at the moment. We are in the shit because of Sherwood much more than the players the board pushed for.  The problem is the two we failed to get in Cambiasso and Adebayor. We should have had decent backup options  for those two.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: cheltenhamlion on January 06, 2016, 05:53:13 PM
Gestede was the back up plan he went for after Adebayor twice failed to turn up for a medical.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Villa in Denmark on January 06, 2016, 06:33:07 PM
Gestede was the back up plan he went for after Adebayor twice failed to turn up for a medical.
If there's even a grain of truth in that (and I'm not doubting it us true), then that is shocking.

Benteke --> Adebayor: Not great but if he can repeat the trick from last time around, probably the closest we can afford to come to a like for like replacement.

Adebayor --> Gestede: WTF! There were absolutely no other strikers on the planet that were potentially available who could actually run about a bit, kick a ball where they meant it to go and were half decent in the air?

Christ the money we spent, I'd rather have had Cardiff's flop Andreas Cornelius back or Mortem Rasmussen from FC Midtjylland and he was shit for Celtic 6 years ago.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: cheltenhamlion on January 06, 2016, 06:37:09 PM
Benteke scored lots of goals with headers. Alright, stats wanker, who scores lots with headers?

Gestede.

Ooooh, I really like Gestede. Get him. Nobody else will do.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Allan C on January 06, 2016, 09:30:29 PM
Been thinking who the worst Villa player I've seen since my first game in 1970. Gestede is definitely in the top 5. Who on earth decided that he is premiership class ??
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Villa in Denmark on January 07, 2016, 10:08:56 AM
Been thinking who the worst Villa player I've seen since my first game in 1970. Gestede is definitely in the top 5. Who on earth decided that he is premiership class ??

I'll have a guess that his name begins with Tim and ends with Sherwood.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: brian green on January 07, 2016, 10:33:20 AM
Deleted.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: passport1 on January 07, 2016, 05:48:48 PM
I remember Sammy Morgan
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Allan C on January 07, 2016, 07:45:54 PM
Sammy Morgan was better. Gestede is so far out of his depth it's frightening
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Rigadon on January 07, 2016, 07:49:19 PM
He really wanted Townshend, Lennon and Adebayor as well.

All would've been miles better than what we have IMO.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: preston28 on January 07, 2016, 11:48:50 PM
I remember Sammy Morgan

My first game in 1973 he got 2 diving headers at the Holte End in a 3-1 victory of Chester City in the FA cup. Getede is far worse!
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: old man villa fan on January 08, 2016, 07:25:39 AM
I remember Sammy Morgan

Six foot two,eyes of blue,Sammy Morgan's after you.

I bet Bob Wilson remembered that game for a long time.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: David_Nab on January 08, 2016, 11:07:54 PM
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3391005/Aston-Villa-free-fall-heading-Championship-Remi-Garde-without-win-real-Villains.html

Quote
Quote
Sherwood believed there was an over-reliance on numbers and a civil war kicked off behind the scenes. When Sherwood wanted to sign Rudy Gestede, he was shown a list of alternatives based on statistics.

Gestede all Sherwoods then
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: ozzjim on January 08, 2016, 11:15:07 PM
Anyone else love to see the alternatives offered??
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Mister E on January 09, 2016, 07:31:30 AM
Sammy Morgan was better. Gestede is so far out of his depth it's frightening
Sammy Morgan was great for the level we were at. Gestede will be when we arrive at that same level. Right now, Gestede is a total plank.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:07:10 AM

This thing came up over the summer and around the time Tim got the boot. The general consensus being he as the manager didn't want all the players we brought in, and according to the crab Wilkins, it was probably near half and half in terms of acquisitions made (or suggested) by the board and manager himself. Collymore's also had a bee in his bonnet of late about it, despite it surely happening at a lot of other clubs as well as ours.

Anyway, looking at the summer signings who do we put them down to ? for me (and it's purely guess work) i reckon the board have done the better business

Ayew - board -Good
Amavi - board - Potential
Veretout - board- Potential
Traore - board - Potential
Gueye - board - Potential
Gestede - Tim -Shit
Sinclair - deal agreed before Tim arrived - Shit
Lescott - Tim - Shit
Crespo - God knows - shit
Ilori - Tim- ?
Bunn - Tim - below average
Richards - Tim - shit
Sarkic - board -?

Just guesses of course

My two pen'orth. For what it's worth.


you have to say if the board  is replacing 1st teamers with players with "potential" that's more worrying than Tim spunking money on reserve duffers with the possible exception of richards. Our midfield needed more than potential imo. of course Tim could have been behind all of them, or none of them. Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 11:13:14 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:17:27 AM
He really wanted Townshend, Lennon and Adebayor as well.

All would've been miles better than what we have IMO.


yep. not a fan of any of them, but someone like adebayor, you would have thought that sherwood would have got the best out of him. Ayew is a player with more potential but maybe he couldn't motivate him or didn't know how he ticks,whereas he knew adeboyer well. That's why a manager's input into transfer deals should be the final word because at the end of the day unless you have a  good relationship with them, they're not going to pull up any trees for you.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 11:19:48 AM
He really wanted Townshend, Lennon and Adebayor as well.

All would've been miles better than what we have IMO.


yep. not a fan of any of them, but someone like adebayor, you would have thought that sherwood would have got the best out of him. Ayew is a player with more potential but maybe he couldn't motivate him or didn't know how he ticks,whereas he knew adeboyer well. That's why a manager's input into transfer deals should be the final word because at the end of the day unless you have a  good relationship with them, they're not going to pull up any trees for you.

So Sherwood says that he wants to sign Adebayor, the board agrees to the signing, Adebayor says that he doesn't want to come because God didn't tell him that he should, so Sherwood decides he wants Gestede as an alternative and the board agrees to that signing.

Which bit of the above is the board's fault again? Apart from agreeing to the daft Gestede signing at the end, obviously.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: ozzjim on January 09, 2016, 11:20:07 AM
But that is making out that he was not allowed to sign Adebayor. He was, he just failed to convince him to come. Sherwood should have found a back up plan for him.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:31:40 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:34:49 AM
He really wanted Townshend, Lennon and Adebayor as well.

All would've been miles better than what we have IMO.


yep. not a fan of any of them, but someone like adebayor, you would have thought that sherwood would have got the best out of him. Ayew is a player with more potential but maybe he couldn't motivate him or didn't know how he ticks,whereas he knew adeboyer well. That's why a manager's input into transfer deals should be the final word because at the end of the day unless you have a  good relationship with them, they're not going to pull up any trees for you.

So Sherwood says that he wants to sign Adebayor, the board agrees to the signing, Adebayor says that he doesn't want to come because God didn't tell him that he should, so Sherwood decides he wants Gestede as an alternative and the board agrees to that signing.

Which bit of the above is the board's fault again? Apart from agreeing to the daft Gestede signing at the end, obviously.


hah. Unless God is the first name of his bank manager i don't believe that at all. We made Adebayor an offer but it was well below what he'd want
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 11:35:00 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees

So if the board's signings were better, why would you want Sherwood wasting more money on shit like Andros Townsend, when the signings that he hand-picked were demonstrably worse than the ones that were recommended to him?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:39:23 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees

So if the board's signings were better, why would you want Sherwood wasting more money on shit like Andros Townsend, when the signings that he hand-picked were demonstrably worse than the ones that were recommended to him?


We needed an experienced striker, we got ayew and gestade. We needed experienced midfielders we got vertout and gueye. Both of 'em and ayew could be winning the league in 5 years but not with us. Abebeyor, lennon and townsend could all do a job this season
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 11:43:22 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees

So if the board's signings were better, why would you want Sherwood wasting more money on shit like Andros Townsend, when the signings that he hand-picked were demonstrably worse than the ones that were recommended to him?


We needed an experienced striker, we got ayew and gestade. We needed experienced midfielders we got vertout and gueye. Both of 'em and ayew could be winning the league in 5 years but not with us. Abebeyor, lennon and townsend could all do it this season

I don't see how you're not getting this. We got Ayew and Gestede. Ayew who is good, and Gestede who isn't. Ayew who Sherwood didn't pick, Gestede who he did.

How is that evidence that we would be better with more of a shit manager's shit signings?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 11:49:47 AM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees

So if the board's signings were better, why would you want Sherwood wasting more money on shit like Andros Townsend, when the signings that he hand-picked were demonstrably worse than the ones that were recommended to him?


We needed an experienced striker, we got ayew and gestade. We needed experienced midfielders we got vertout and gueye. Both of 'em and ayew could be winning the league in 5 years but not with us. Abebeyor, lennon and townsend could all do it this season

I don't see how you're not getting this. We got Ayew and Gestede. Ayew who is good, and Gestede who isn't. Ayew who Sherwood didn't pick, Gestede who he did.

How is that evidence that we would be better with more of a shit manager's shit signings?


None of them is good enough currently. Ayew who's the best of the lot would have made a good signing behind an experienced striker not carrying the burden alone in his first season. If you sell Benteke, delph and let Cleverly go, then it makes sense that the players bought in to replace them should be of the required standard. If none of them are, and they're the board's signings then its their fault, no matter how much better they are than the manager's buys
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 11:55:58 AM
(quote pyramid removed)

None of them is good enough currently. Ayew who's the best of the lot would have made a good signing behind an experienced striker not carrying the burden alone in his first season. If you sell Benteke, delph and let Cleverly go, then it makes sense that the players bought in to replace them should be of the required standard. If none of them are, and they're the board's signings then its their fault, no matter how much better they are than the manager's buys

What if the ones that do seem to be up to standard (Ayew, Amavi, Veretout) are the boards signings and the ones that don't seem to be up to standard (Gestede, Lescott, Richards) are the manager's signings? Why are you so desperate to insist that's the board's fault and not the managers?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 12:01:20 PM
(quote pyramid removed)

None of them is good enough currently. Ayew who's the best of the lot would have made a good signing behind an experienced striker not carrying the burden alone in his first season. If you sell Benteke, delph and let Cleverly go, then it makes sense that the players bought in to replace them should be of the required standard. If none of them are, and they're the board's signings then its their fault, no matter how much better they are than the manager's buys

What if the ones that do seem to be up to standard (Ayew, Amavi, Veretout) are the boards signings and the ones that don't seem to be up to standard (Gestede, Lescott, Richards) are the manager's signings? Why are you so desperate to insist that's the board's fault and not the managers?

I'm not at all. I just think we needed to replace delpth, benteke and cleverly. Not that any of them were particularly brilliant but they were of a certain standard. As i said, i believe the foreign, relatively unknown signings were board signings - I could be wrong and none of us know really, but the foreign relatively unknown players replaced them three IMO. Richards, Lescott..well we didn't have a great defence last season but they weren't key signings to my mind.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 12:05:01 PM
(quote pyramid removed)

None of them is good enough currently. Ayew who's the best of the lot would have made a good signing behind an experienced striker not carrying the burden alone in his first season. If you sell Benteke, delph and let Cleverly go, then it makes sense that the players bought in to replace them should be of the required standard. If none of them are, and they're the board's signings then its their fault, no matter how much better they are than the manager's buys

What if the ones that do seem to be up to standard (Ayew, Amavi, Veretout) are the boards signings and the ones that don't seem to be up to standard (Gestede, Lescott, Richards) are the manager's signings? Why are you so desperate to insist that's the board's fault and not the managers?

I'm not at all. I just think we needed to replace delpth, benteke and cleverly. Not that any of them were particularly brilliant but they were of a certain standard. As i said, i believe the foreign, relatively unknown signings were board signings - I could be wrong and none of us know really, but the foreign relatively unknown players replaced them three IMO. Richards, Lescott..well we didn't have a great defence last season but they weren't key signings to my mind.

Of those three, Benteke was the biggest loss by a mile and replaced by Gestede. By all accounts, at the request of Sherwood when they were suggesting alternatives. Is that the board's fault, or Sherwood's fault?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 12:14:41 PM
(quote pyramid removed)

None of them is good enough currently. Ayew who's the best of the lot would have made a good signing behind an experienced striker not carrying the burden alone in his first season. If you sell Benteke, delph and let Cleverly go, then it makes sense that the players bought in to replace them should be of the required standard. If none of them are, and they're the board's signings then its their fault, no matter how much better they are than the manager's buys

What if the ones that do seem to be up to standard (Ayew, Amavi, Veretout) are the boards signings and the ones that don't seem to be up to standard (Gestede, Lescott, Richards) are the manager's signings? Why are you so desperate to insist that's the board's fault and not the managers?

I'm not at all. I just think we needed to replace delpth, benteke and cleverly. Not that any of them were particularly brilliant but they were of a certain standard. As i said, i believe the foreign, relatively unknown signings were board signings - I could be wrong and none of us know really, but the foreign relatively unknown players replaced them three IMO. Richards, Lescott..well we didn't have a great defence last season but they weren't key signings to my mind.

Of those three, Benteke was the biggest loss by a mile and replaced by Gestede. By all accounts, at the request of Sherwood when they were suggesting alternatives. Is that the board's fault, or Sherwood's fault?


I don't really agree. Our midfield is the biggest problem and while delph and cleverly were no big shakes they had a bit of dominance. Gestade cost 6m. Ayew cost 8m. He was the board's new Benteke in my opinion and would have arrived anyway. Sherwood wanted someone else, couldn't get him,  so bought a cheap alternative. Gestede is shit but the one they expected to follow the Benteke route was Ayew.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 12:29:15 PM
Gestade cost 6m. Ayew cost 8m. He was the board's new Benteke in my opinion and would have arrived anyway. Sherwood wanted someone else, couldn't get him,  so bought a cheap alternative. Gestede is shit but the one they expected to follow the Benteke route was Ayew.

Even though the person that we signed who plays in Benteke's position is Gestede? Who then did we sign to replace Weimann, who played in a similar position to Ayew?

Using the same logic, I'll assert that the person that we signed to replace Vlaar was Amavi, not Richards or Lescott. He's the defender that we spent the most money on after all, even though he plays in a different position.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: saunders_heroes on January 09, 2016, 12:30:52 PM
Personally i'd say most of the foreign lot were board choices after they baulked at sherwood paying the going rate for premiership players

You mean our better signings were 'board choices'?

And a fairy dies every time somebody calls it the 'Premiership'.

Well they're better signings in a "best of a terrible batch of signings" way, but buying someone like veretout or gueye for 17m as "potentially good but out of their depth currently" in key positions is rather more damaging than buying lescott and richards on frees

So if the board's signings were better, why would you want Sherwood wasting more money on shit like Andros Townsend, when the signings that he hand-picked were demonstrably worse than the ones that were recommended to him?

Tell you what I wouldn't be turning my nose up at Andros Townsend for anyone at our squad right now.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 12:34:03 PM
Tell you what I wouldn't be turning my nose up at Andros Townsend for anyone at our squad right now.

We've got enough attackers who can neither score goals nor create goals without adding another one.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: saunders_heroes on January 09, 2016, 12:37:02 PM
Tell you what I wouldn't be turning my nose up at Andros Townsend for anyone at our squad right now.

We've got enough attackers who can neither score goals nor create goals without adding another one.

I disagree, I think he could have done a job here. We'll never know now though.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 12:49:03 PM
Tell you what I wouldn't be turning my nose up at Andros Townsend for anyone at our squad right now.

We've got enough attackers who can neither score goals nor create goals without adding another one.

I disagree, I think he could have done a job here. We'll never know now though.

20 odd goals across 200 games in his career. Five of them in the Premier League.  Scott Sinclair has more than twice as many goals in approximately the same amount of games. Townsend has scored 10 goals for Spurs in 86 matches. Sinclair has 9 in 33 for us.

What job would Townsend be doing for us is it's nowhere near as good as what a not-very-good Scott Sinclair can do?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 12:51:11 PM
Gestade cost 6m. Ayew cost 8m. He was the board's new Benteke in my opinion and would have arrived anyway. Sherwood wanted someone else, couldn't get him,  so bought a cheap alternative. Gestede is shit but the one they expected to follow the Benteke route was Ayew.

Even though the person that we signed who plays in Benteke's position is Gestede? Who then did we sign to replace Weimann, who played in a similar position to Ayew?

Using the same logic, I'll assert that the person that we signed to replace Vlaar was Amavi, not Richards or Lescott. He's the defender that we spent the most money on after all, even though he plays in a different position.

Buh? And we have a fixed formation forever? Maybe sherwood was changing things?  I'm just saying if you lose your main striker for a lot of money, then logic says you spend more on replacing him than a back-up.

Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why? Mebbe they wanted Ayew and he got the leftovers to spend.

My personal opinion, for what it is worth, is they're certain players like Ayew, Vertout etc.. that they target - the sort of players  arsenal and chelsea buy and loan out for a few years -  in the hope of getting another Benteke. The trouble with that is they're not always ready and they're not cheap to buy. This season the budget tipped too far in that direction rather than buying proven players
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 12:55:34 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 12:58:22 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?


Because we've been run on a shoestring since Houllier's time?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 01:02:23 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?


Because we've been run on a shoestring since Houllier's time?

So... which type of "shoestring" signings do you think were our first choices if you think neither Gestede nor Adebayor were? There must be a reason that you think that the first person we tried to sign and the one that we ultimately did sign weren't the people that we wanted to sign.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: SamTheMouse on January 09, 2016, 01:02:27 PM
Of those three, Benteke was the biggest loss by a mile and replaced by Gestede. By all accounts, at the request of Sherwood when they were suggesting alternatives. Is that the board's fault, or Sherwood's fault?

I haven't seen anything to this effect reported anywhere, but it certainly sounds plausible. Depressingly so!

Where did you see it, out of interest?
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 01:08:20 PM
Of those three, Benteke was the biggest loss by a mile and replaced by Gestede. By all accounts, at the request of Sherwood when they were suggesting alternatives. Is that the board's fault, or Sherwood's fault?

I haven't seen anything to this effect reported anywhere, but it certainly sounds plausible. Depressingly so!

Where did you see it, out of interest?

Reply #20 on this thread.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 01:11:59 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?


Because we've been run on a shoestring since Houllier's time?

So... which type of "shoestring" signings do you think were our first choices if you think neither Gestede nor Adebayor were? There must be a reason that you think that the first person we tried to sign and the one that we ultimately did sign weren't the people that we wanted to sign.

ah, i'm on about who Sherwood wanted to sign, not the club. Just look at our spending. you pocket 45m from sales, spend 8m more on top and your main striking replacement gets 15% of that budget, if that. Now Sherwood may be a fuckwitt but he knows the going rate for a premiership striker and its not 6m or 8m
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Dave on January 09, 2016, 01:19:06 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?


Because we've been run on a shoestring since Houllier's time?

So... which type of "shoestring" signings do you think were our first choices if you think neither Gestede nor Adebayor were? There must be a reason that you think that the first person we tried to sign and the one that we ultimately did sign weren't the people that we wanted to sign.

ah, i'm on about who Sherwood wanted to sign, not the club. Just look at our spending. you pocket 45m from sales, spend 8m more on top and your main striking replacement gets 15% of that budget, if that. Now Sherwood may be a fuckwitt but he knows the going rate for a premiership striker and its not 6m or 8m

The striker that he wanted to sign would have been joining us on a transfer fee of £0. How does that fit into the 'going rate'?

premiership

*sigh*
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: SamTheMouse on January 09, 2016, 01:23:32 PM
Of those three, Benteke was the biggest loss by a mile and replaced by Gestede. By all accounts, at the request of Sherwood when they were suggesting alternatives. Is that the board's fault, or Sherwood's fault?

I haven't seen anything to this effect reported anywhere, but it certainly sounds plausible. Depressingly so!

Where did you see it, out of interest?

Reply #20 on this thread.

Ah thanks. Yep, I can just see Sherwood drooling over the pantomime horse that is Gestede. Great scouting, there Tim. You twat.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 09, 2016, 01:25:02 PM
Now i'm not defending Sherwood but if you were in the market for a top striker, then a middling championship striker wouldn't be your 1st, 2nd or 3rd choice however much of a bellend of a manager you are. Neither would adebayor frankly so you think why?

Because we tried to sign Adebayor, agreed a deal with his club then he decided that he didn't want to come to us. And when that happened we signed Gestede. That's a pretty good sign that Adebayor was first choice and Gestede was second choice.

Why would you think that Adebayor and Gestede weren't our first and second choices?


Because we've been run on a shoestring since Houllier's time?

So... which type of "shoestring" signings do you think were our first choices if you think neither Gestede nor Adebayor were? There must be a reason that you think that the first person we tried to sign and the one that we ultimately did sign weren't the people that we wanted to sign.

ah, i'm on about who Sherwood wanted to sign, not the club. Just look at our spending. you pocket 45m from sales, spend 8m more on top and your main striking replacement gets 15% of that budget, if that. Now Sherwood may be a fuckwitt but he knows the going rate for a premiership striker and its not 6m or 8m

The striker that he wanted to sign would have been joining us on a transfer fee of £0. How does that fit into the 'going rate'?

larf! yeah i'm sure sherwood was told money no object. He went for adebeyor because what was saved on the transfer fee went on the wages. The fact remains if you pocket 32 million for a striker you should at least be looking at spending nearly half that on a top quality replacement, not hunt around the the championship and European backwaters for a bargain or someone with potential.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Villa in Denmark on January 09, 2016, 04:00:16 PM
There were photos of Adebayor at Bodymoor Heath during the closest season.

Then just after the transfer window came

Emmanuel Adebayor refuses to leave Tottenham Hotspur because he needs a sign from God (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/11837986/Emmanuel-Adebayor-refuses-to-leave-Tottenham-Hotspur-because-he-needs-a-sign-from-God.html)
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: PaulWinch again on January 11, 2016, 02:43:44 PM
There were photos of Adebayor at Bodymoor Heath during the closest season.

Then just after the transfer window came

Emmanuel Adebayor refuses to leave Tottenham Hotspur because he needs a sign from God (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/11837986/Emmanuel-Adebayor-refuses-to-leave-Tottenham-Hotspur-because-he-needs-a-sign-from-God.html)

In fairness God was clearly looking after Adebayor when he didn't give him a sign to move Villa.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: Ron Manager on January 11, 2016, 02:46:40 PM
There were photos of Adebayor at Bodymoor Heath during the closest season.

Then just after the transfer window came

Emmanuel Adebayor refuses to leave Tottenham Hotspur because he needs a sign from God (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/11837986/Emmanuel-Adebayor-refuses-to-leave-Tottenham-Hotspur-because-he-needs-a-sign-from-God.html)

In fairness God was clearly looking after Adebayor when he didn't give him a sign to move Villa.

and God was looking after us as well!
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: PaulWinch again on January 11, 2016, 02:55:56 PM
There were photos of Adebayor at Bodymoor Heath during the closest season.

Then just after the transfer window came

Emmanuel Adebayor refuses to leave Tottenham Hotspur because he needs a sign from God (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/tottenham-hotspur/11837986/Emmanuel-Adebayor-refuses-to-leave-Tottenham-Hotspur-because-he-needs-a-sign-from-God.html)

In fairness God was clearly looking after Adebayor when he didn't give him a sign to move Villa.

and God was looking after us as well!

I wouldn't be rushing to thank him, we have Gestede.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: David_Nab on January 11, 2016, 04:41:54 PM
In fitting with the theme , Sherwood reportedly wanted Townsend reports today are Spurs want 14mil , no loan and he not played 90 mins in 2 years.Sure this would have been same in summer hence why we didn't go in for him

At end of summer window we tried to get Dwight Gayle , I would have gone for him before Gestede at least he has goals in Prem league
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: LeeB on January 11, 2016, 10:47:59 PM
In fitting with the theme , Sherwood reportedly wanted Townsend reports today are Spurs want 14mil , no loan and he not played 90 mins in 2 years.Sure this would have been same in summer hence why we didn't go in for him

At end of summer window we tried to get Dwight Gayle , I would have gone for him before Gestede at least he has goals in Prem league

What a sorry state of affairs though. Dwight Gayle, who's keen and lively but limited, and Afro Bambi.

Under normal circumstances, a sale like Benteke's should mean looking in the £15-20m mark for a replacement, at least.

We were lining up what would be probably the worst front pairing I'd have seen watching us, and even failed to pull that off.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: old man villa fan on January 11, 2016, 11:18:41 PM
I still think the problem is not with who we brought in but the extra money needed to replace others that are still here.  There are gaping holes in our squad.
Title: Re: Board vs Manager Signings
Post by: sickbeggar on January 12, 2016, 12:23:37 AM
I still think the problem is not with who we brought in but the extra money needed to replace others that are still here.  There are gaping holes in our squad.


Well thats the real problem obviously. you sell a player for 32m so you skimp on his replacement because you need to replace someone like delpth who would cost far more than what his release clause was. Likewise Cleverly.In midfield especially we bought players who may be premiership quality in 12 months time instead of currently. If we'd actually spent big money on experienced quality players to replace them 3 instead of throwing it too thinly around other areas we wouldn't be bottom thats for sure
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal