Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Hookeysmith on January 09, 2022, 10:52:19 PM
-
Surely we have to consider releasing some players and even if we can move on
El Ghazhi
Trez
Traore
How do we keep Luiz/ Ramsey / mcginn/ Bailey / Young / Marvellous if talk of Bassouma is correct.
Are we in danger of having too many players to try and keep happy
-
No. Successful clubs have big squads. We need strength in depth.
-
This is the challenge for any manager of an ambitious club, no?
-
As well as strength in depth the better run clubs always have their replacements in before they sell. Something I am liking about this ownership.
-
No. Successful clubs have big squads. We need strength in depth.
Is the correct answer.
-
I agree with squad depth etc but where do players like Bailey fit in?
If we get Bissouma what happens with Nakamba or Luiz
I can't see either being happy with being benched
-
At the moment I agree. We're shit in the cups/and or get really difficult draws and we're not in Europe. It'll probably be another 40 game season for us, the minimum amount possible.
Too many senior players especially when the owners apparently want to have the best youth set-up in the country. Bidace, Archer and Chuck will all be crowded-out.
-
We're going through transitions on two fronts with the squad at the moment - 1: from a lower mid table team to a European challenging team and 2. from Smith's team to Gerrard's team, so we're bound to have more players than we need short term.
The key though is to move those on who aren't good enough as quickly as possible for sensible fees so that we don't break the financial model.
-
I think a quick look at our substitutes bench for the majority of games this season answers this question, we have simply not had enough to make effective changes in game.
I understand the desire to bring through young players and the concern about keeping players happy, but I think a lot of that feeling comes from the fact that we've never, ever had a big squad of quality players, given that it's a relatively new thing. (The last time we won a trophy you had three subs including 1 keeper.)
The game has changed and big squads with 15 or so players that could be regular starters is essential if you want to be challenging in all areas.
-
Surely we have to consider releasing some players and even if we can move on
El Ghazhi
Trez
Traore
How do we keep Luiz/ Ramsey / mcginn/ Bailey / Young / Marvellous if talk of Bassouma is correct.
Are we in danger of having too many players to try and keep happy
We also need to keep people like Chuky on these lists of players needing gametime, otherwise he and others will go elsewhere.
-
Surely we have to consider releasing some players and even if we can move on
El Ghazhi
Trez
Traore
How do we keep Luiz/ Ramsey / mcginn/ Bailey / Young / Marvellous if talk of Bassouma is correct.
Are we in danger of having too many players to try and keep happy
We also need to keep people like Chuky on these lists of players needing gametime, otherwise he and others will go elsewhere.
Send the kids out on loan. That's how Chelsea built a squad to win the European cup. Let them prove themselves in the Championship the same way the likea of Mason Mount did.
-
Not too many players, just a poor distribution. I'm old fashioned so I want 11 players and then 11 reserves. That leaves 3 spaces for specialists, and utility players, plus U21 players above the 25 man squad. So obviously we are short in defence with mainly unproven youth as cover and overloaded in other positions. The key is developing the youth players to the standard where they are at least the recognised reserve by 22/23 or getting rid - that will hopefully save us money in the long term. Digne arriving will bring much needed strength in that position, and obviously he has to start shifting some of the reserve players elsewhere in the team and making the decision whether the bought-in reserves are a better bet than the youth players.
-
No. Successful clubs have big squads. We need strength in depth.
There are plenty of unsuccessful clubs that have big squads, Man U are a prime example where the squad is so flabby that good players are rotting the club from within. Man City and Liverpool’s squads are full of quality but they’re not that big with players often playing out of position.
There’s a balance to be struck and I think we are in danger of having a few players ostracised from the team whilst potentially blocking the pathway for our youth players.
-
Everyone calls for better players. We can't leave ourselves in a situation where we haven't enough cover.
There will be players leaving, AEG, Trez, perhaps Traore. I even think we may lose the likes of Luiz in time. Targett, Hause may not stick around and Tuanzebe has gone, with Davis out on loan.
We are building to mount a definite challenge for Europe for next season and, with a decent run this, we could still qualify.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
I think we spent enough under MON, he just spent badly in his later years at the club.
-
Think we could do with shifting some Wingers and Central Midfielders.
Also players like Kalinic, Guilbert (much as I like him), Keinan and Big Wes. Obviously some are out on loan anyway and Hot Lips will be off at the end of the season.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
Well we certainly paid the money and had the numbers for a quality squad under MON. They were just shit, which is probably why some of us are nervous
-
Think we could do with shifting some Wingers and Central Midfielders.
Also players like Kalinic, Guilbert (much as I like him), Keinan and Big Wes. Obviously some are out on loan anyway and Hot Lips will be off at the end of the season.
Wingers yes, we have 2 extra compared to last season. Coutinho, Buendia, Bailey and Traore is a fantastic set of options, Trez and AEG just don't seem to fit anymore.
Midfield I disagree I think we're one short in there. We play with 3, normally a defensive player and 2 more general options, if you, as seems to be the case for most on here, see Luiz as part of the latter group then we have McGinn, Luiz, Sanson and Ramsey for those 2 and Nakamba for the defensive role with no obvious cover for him (other than shifting one of the others deeper). Another Defensive player in there and we'd have a really strong midfield.
Hourihane has already gone, his contract ends in the summer so he'll never be part of our squad again, Guilbert would be worth another look in my opinion but KKH might have overtaken him by the summer. Kalinic will be a tough one to move on, might just have to wait it out until his contract ends. Wes and Davis are both on key loans right now that will play a big part in what happens next in their careers, we need to wait unti lthe summer to see what happens there.
-
The only concern for me is that the transfer policy does seem to be going back to relying heavily on 'proven' Premier League performers. Of the signings in the summer and since the only one who hadn't played in the Premier League previously was Bailey. In and of itself this might not be a bad thing necessarily, but it is rather reminiscent of what happened under MON, when I thought that the infrastructure at the club nowadays meant we were looking at uncovered gems not just obvious choices.
-
I agree that if you look at the four wider forwards (10s? Inside-forwards? I don't know anymore) thems some stellar options. I also don't think it's as bad news for Carney as has been reported, as I think Gerrard sees him in midfield, competing with Ramsey for a place. Exciting times.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
I think we spent enough under MON, he just spent badly in his later years at the club.
Just to clarify, yes, I appreciate all the criticisms of the MON era- buying the wrong players etc. The point is, I guess, we didn't use the squad. We ran the 11-14 players into the ground.
In my opinion the villa didn't adjust to having a big squad that you rotate. I heard Brian Little say that this is where he also went wrong, he preferred having his first 11-14 players and struggled when it came to assembling a squad.
-
It feels unbalanced right now because we have decided to go ahead and sign the players Gerrard thinks we need before we let anyone go. That suggests to me that we are having a crack at getting into Europe this season, which seems unlikely but I can't fault the ambition. The knock on impact will be less incomings in the summer presumably, while we see quite a few exits. It probably wouldn't have been so dramatic if the new system wasn't so different to Smiths, with the need for wing backs and 'number 10's' instead of full backs and wingers.
The danger is we won't get much for the new 'bomb squad' but I don't see how we can avoid that now if we want to progress.
-
I'm perfectly happy with the current approach of "buy who we want before we sell who we don't need".
Given the choice between a few fringe players being unhappy at their amount of playing time, or fans being unhappy at the lack of decent options on the bench, I know which I'd choose.
-
Anyway with Phil we only have 20 non-youth players, so the answers is no, not at all.
-
Steer, Hause, Targett, El Ghazi and Trez won't be here next season imo.
Would've put Nakamba in with those two months back but in fairness he's done well and fully expect him to get new deal as back up DM for next few years.
Luiz has yet to sign a new contract. He's a must keep for me but perhaps he'll move on.
Ings is interesting one. I think we could well move him on if we get a money back offer in the summer but who knows perhaps the goal at Brentford will spark another 10 between now and May.
We are top heavy out wide but I wouldn't say other areas we're flowing with numerous options. A few prem teams have 5 CBs, we just have three currently.
Another factor is I assume 9 subs is here to stay so that's 18 outfield players involved on a matchday. Makes sense to put on bench 2-3 kids but you obviously need more experienced options aswell to tip balance of game in your favour.
-
I think City / Chelsea / Liverpool keep huge squads fresh and happy as they play so many games (ironically something their coaches continually complain about) but until we are there i see a few of ours getting unhappy, especially the younger players.
I mean take Bailey as an example, i don't know the man or his attitude but he was a big star when we bought him and a lot of our fans were raving that he was the potential superstar to launch us into the next level.
Now injuries aside i would struggle to see where he would fit in so will he be happy to be on the bench seemingly more than in the team?
Just look how rancid United have become with the prima donnas all having a moan. We have seen first hand what happens when the club starts to turn toxic
-
Two of Trez, Troare, and El Goalzi will go. I suspect Traore could be kept and for me, because he's a little mercurial, he's a useful game changer. El Goalzi can put chances away and takes a mean pen, but doesn't create enough. He's been great for us all told, to help us to this point, but for the next step, he's not good enough. Trezegeut likewise. I'll overlook that shambolic dive because generally he's always grafted and tried. But time to go, because he's pretty limited as a player. AEG will have takers. Trezeguet will be harder to shift, as we'll have to pelt him out to a club in Europe in a league that might struggle with the wages we've put him on. Goalzi will conceivably be courted by Prem clubs (West Ham?) or back in Holland.
As said, Hause will be upgraded. We need a better third choice, and in theory a youngster could then take 4th spot. We probably need a better backup than Steer, and by the same token, Jed is too good and too old now to stays as a third choice. He should go to the champ and play a full season. He needs to play now, but that can't really be here. Wesley will go permanently too.
Then in CM I think Gerrard is running the rule over Douglas, Sanson to see if they're gonna be worth keeping longer term. I suspect Sanson will actually be the one who makes it, and Douglas might get pushed on unless he improves his workrate.
Jury is out on Bailey too, but a big part of that is his injury record.
-
Steer is a tough one for me. If he doesn't play much then I trust him to come in for a game or 2 here and there but if Emi picked up a long-term injury I'd be very nervous about Steer taking over for a long run of games. I guess that makes him a 2.5 keeper and I guess a loan for half a year to see if can prove himself as a 2nd is a good idea, would need to be to a top half of championship or scottish prem level side though, not much point him going any lower than that.
Randolph in for 6 months to allow for that and then make a decision in the summer seems ok. Either wat I'd keep Sinisalo as 3rd and be looking for him to step up over the next 18months, I think he's got the potential to be a very good keeper, I like Marschall as well and I suspect 1 of them will make it with us (at least as the backup/cup keeper).
-
We need strength in depth but I'm sure he will ship some out the one's he doesn't fancy.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
Yes, I think we do.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
Yes, I think we do.
Yep. I find threads like this amazing to be honest. For the first time in god knows how long we’re showing some real ambition, and rather than just enjoy it, people are worrying about the size of the squad?
Two things:
1) Big, successful clubs have large squads
2) If a player isn’t happy because of not playing, then he generally hasn’t done enough to get past the player in his position who is playing. In which case tough shit.
-
I sometimes wonder, do we have a sort of 'fear of success'?
This thing of having a quality squad is the one leap we didn't make when we had good teams in 1997, the 00s and again under MON.
Yes, I think we do.
Yep. I find threads like this amazing to be honest. For the first time in god knows how long we’re showing some real ambition, and rather than just enjoy it, people are worrying about the size of the squad?
Two things:
1) Big, successful clubs have large squads
2) If a player isn’t happy because of not playing, then he generally hasn’t done enough to get past the player in his position who is playing. In which case tough shit.
I'd generally agree with you, with the only exception being the youth players coming through. Saying "tough shit" to an 18 year old who can't get past the established international ahead of him in the pecking order is the road to financial ruin. But that's where we need to do better with loaning the kids out, something that thankfully seems to have come on leaps and bounds since our current owners took over.
-
Agreed.
But only when the clubs play the loanees!
-
I think we are in danger of having a squad that is big enough and good enough to make watching Villa more of a joy than a chore. How many times have we said, look at that bench, we're down to the bare bones? How many times have our plans been fucked because of injuries to players for whom we don't have an adequate understudy, how many times have we seen players look fatigued or learnt that they are playing through the pain barrier, to the detriment of their physical condition?
We need a big squad and we need a big-club mentality. FTF!
-
I think we are in danger of having a squad that is big enough and good enough to make watching Villa more of a joy than a chore. How many times have we said, look at that bench, we're down to the bare bones? How many times have our plans been fucked because of injuries to players for whom we don't have an adequate understudy, how many times have we seen players look fatigued or learnt that they are playing through the pain barrier, to the detriment of their physical condition?
We need a big squad and we need a big-club mentality. FTF!
What Daz said! UTFV!
-
The point was more about our youth players coming through but i do concede like with Greedy and Ramsay if they are good enough they will force themselves into contention.
Maybe the likes of Bailey (The big player that worries me the most about coming good) will be motivated to really pull up some trees - i certainly hope so. But the evidence is already that the people behind him like to be heard and i wonder they will start to unsettle him if he is not getting game time.
-
He'll get game time. If he performs.
-
He'll get game time. If he performs.
And can stay fit.
-
I’d like us to be in danger of having too many top players one day. But until then no, we don’t have too many players. The ones who are not up to it simply won’t make the 25 we register at the end of this window
-
What a question. The top 4 clubs can field 2 quality first 11's. We sometimes struggle to field one.
-
What a question. The top 4 clubs can field 2 quality first 11's. We sometimes struggle to field one.
I'm not sure that's enitely true (for example Liverpool are pretty weak outside a core 15-16 players, I'd say it's closer for Chelsea and Man City though) but yes, it should be the goal.
-
What a question. The top 4 clubs can field 2 quality first 11's. We sometimes struggle to field one.
I think two decent XIs, so 22 quality players, should be the objective. The remainder of the squad should be youth players.
As/If the youth develop then players from the ‘second’ XI should be sold to the squad regenerates from the bottom up.
-
We register a 25 squad, if that becomes a great first 11, 5-6 players behind who are good enough to be regular starters and another 5-6 who are a level below that but are either young and improving or are experienced backup whilst kids come through then I think we've got the balance about right. The first 16-17 in that list are the players you'd expect to see with at least 25 league appearances in a season then the other would be more towards 10-15.
-
We register a 25 squad, if that becomes a great first 11, 5-6 players behind who are good enough to be regular starters and another 5-6 who are a level below that but are either young and improving or are experienced backup whilst kids come through then I think we've got the balance about right. The first 16-17 in that list are the players you'd expect to see with at least 25 league appearances in a season then the other would be more towards 10-15.
I'd say that's about right. In any given first 11 you'd generally want the goalie and back four to be pretty stable so it's the other 6 you'd expect to be chopped and changed to keep things fresh and ensure that whilst they should be of similar quality, they all get enough game time to not get pissed off.
So you've then effectively got 17 first team players with 8 youngsters or experienced players that are happy to play a bit part in proceedings. The youngsters are the challenge as you need them to be able to step in if required but you've got to acknowledge that they're also missing out on the development opportunity that comes with going out on loan. All while giving them the belief that they're on the pathway to the first team if they develop.
-
Well it didnt/hasn't/won't do Chelski or the shit of Manchester any harm.
-
What a question. The top 4 clubs can field 2 quality first 11's. We sometimes struggle to field one.
But they also have long runs in league and FA cups and endless rounds of Chumps league games to give players game time. Ironically they then spend all their time moaning that they play too many games!
-
Well it didnt/hasn't/won't do Chelski or the shit of Manchester any harm.
I dunno. Selling 21 year old Romelu Lukaku to Everton for £31m and then buying 28 year old Romelu Lukaku back for £100m+ wasn't the best bit of business Chelsea ever did.
-
What a question. The top 4 clubs can field 2 quality first 11's. We sometimes struggle to field one.
But they also have long runs in league and FA cups and endless rounds of Chumps league games to give players game time. Ironically they then spend all their time moaning that they play too many games!
Because they have a large pool of talented players... Without the squad we won't be in Europe and the late stages of cups.
-
Well it didnt/hasn't/won't do Chelski or the shit of Manchester any harm.
I dunno. Selling 21 year old Romelu Lukaku to Everton for £31m and then buying 28 year old Romelu Lukaku back for £100m+ wasn't the best bit of business Chelsea ever did.
Exactly my point - they can afford to do it without even noticing the merest hiccup in their cash flow - reckon we could do likewise??.....
-
Well it didnt/hasn't/won't do Chelski or the shit of Manchester any harm.
I dunno. Selling 21 year old Romelu Lukaku to Everton for £31m and then buying 28 year old Romelu Lukaku back for £100m+ wasn't the best bit of business Chelsea ever did.
Exactly my point - they can afford to do it without even noticing the merest hiccup in their cash flow - reckon we could do likewise??.....
They'll notice a £70m loss.
They may have more scope to absorb such a loss because of their regular place in the Champions League but they couldn't keep doing that.
-
25 playing squad so No.