Villa's last four managers

[luke25]

This one?

Thats the one

[SoccerHQ]

Taylor mark 2 I never got the feeling was going to work, from his few months in charge before 02/03.

I get a similar feeling with Houllier although we won't be as low as 16th next season hopefully.

Never beas that gobshite O'dreary though.

Not sure what MON is doing in that list purely based on the job he did. Hated the way he walked out and some of the contracts he gave to players but compared to the other three?

[Louzie0]

Check out our Facebook page for the answer.

do not have facebook

please share otherwise

honest - do not have facebook - film put me off, no wonder it did not get an oscar.

[Legion]

Heroes & Villains is the best selling unofficial fanzine of the most beautifully named football team in the world. It is written by supporters, for supporters and is not afraid to say what it thinks. The publication has now been going for over 20 years. The website, now in it's 13th year (on-line in various guises since 31st March 1997), is the longest running Villa website in the world.

[Pat McMahon]

...

I assume you mean that given MON's 100% record in games against the Blues that if he was still here we would have beaten them in the QF and at worst prevented them from winning their first Wembley final and at best actually won it ourselves?

And if you think DOL's squad that finished 16th was better than that which MON left - in shite circumstances, I think we all agree - after three 6th place finishes then I am glad you are nowhere near our coaching staff and that you have nothing to do with our transfer policy.
...

I'll give you a clue. If you want to make a case for O'Neil, coaching and transfer policy are probably best glossed over.

So if he was poor at coaching and transfer policy and we finished 6th on three consecutive seasons, with the small matter of making our first final and Wembley appearances in 10 years, are you saying he was a genius in all other areas of management to overcome these faults?

[Cuz]

GH is getting me as angry as Pug nose, MON and Sir GT shouldn't be on the list, its close and getting closer G Mac as the mute number 2 is swinging it GH's way i'm afraid, yes he is as bad as O'Leary   

[ktvillan]

Cant believe 5 people have voted for MON, cant believe he's even on the list.
Just goes to show how blinded some people really are by their hatred for the man.
......

I voted for O'Neil. It wasn't based on hatred or c*** factor. O'Leary edges him out on both.

None of those managers were/are going to win us anything. It's all about the legacy they leave behind them for the next guy. At least O'Leary's crap was easily disposed of, and he did actually leave a few good players, better than we now have.

O'Neil was like a kid in a sweetshop with all the money he had. He left us with an enormous wage bill and a small squad. Quite an achievement. We'll be living with the consequences for a while yet.

After seeing Small Heath win the League Cup and Tottenham strump Milan, I could not help but think that it should have been us - and would have been but for crass mismanagement.

I have some sympathy for this view - O'Neill had unprecedented backing for a Villa manager and despite his 6th places and his carling cup final, in my view he spunked away our best ever  opportunity to really build  something. RL and co will never be in a position to back future managers as much because of the money wasted by him.  And in the process he served up some of the most god awful football I've ever seen. Then he shat on the club.

That said, SGT II had lost it and was lucky not to take us down, and O'Leary was such a dick that it's hard to say MON was worse.

If Houllier takes us down he will have outdone them all.

[OzVilla]

Pugnose by a country mile but GH is starting to put in a spirtited challenge.  The more he speaks the more he seems to piss me off.

His monologue about the Villa team giving up at Man Citeh in the league, how embarressed he was as his teams never give up only for the same Manager to then play a weakened team in the Cup tie there, I think he might have some mental issues.

GT Mk II and MON shouldn't be anywhere near such a list.

[sfx412]

Can the 6 who voted for MON explain how, by any definition, his reign was worse than DOL or the current shambles.

perhaps because this 'current shambles' may have many of its roots in his past performance.
Anyway an unfair comparison  2 reigned under Ellis, 2 under Randy and one of them hasn't had a full season and only one window.
Plus its easy to see from the comments of outrage from some that any unbiased view is impossible.
GT stepped into an impossible situation and never coped.
DOL has the distinction of being a major catalyst in the departure of Ellis and the resultant takeover by Randy.
Mon stabilised the club broght up its profile, wasted a fortune, achived no more than Dol did in his first season with a W mill spend then wlalked away at the worst possible time.
Houllier has at least 9 more games before any assessment can be made

[Holtenderinthesky]

I can't believe that people have voted for MON.  How on Earth did he do worse at Villa than GT, DOL and GH?  Madness, and no clear head, devoid of any bitterness, would vote for him on footballing reasons.  He did NOT do worse than the other 3, he did miles better.

[Louzie0]

I think there's a difference between the comments and the vote.

I know there is, because I voted for O'Leary (no comment necessary) and commented in the context of the thread - villa's 4 last managers - about my disappointment re. O'Neill.

If I had known then what I know now about the disgraceful tribunal...

well, I would probably still have voted for DOL but I would have been a lot harder on MON in the comment.

I bet MON's quaking in his boots.

[Steve R]

...

So if he was poor at coaching and transfer policy and we finished 6th on three consecutive seasons, with the small matter of making our first final and Wembley appearances in 10 years, are you saying he was a genius in all other areas of management to overcome these faults?

Not a genius at all. His was a pragmatic style of football that was sufficient to garner points on a regular basis. Nothing to be sniffed at, but what is that worth today?

The 6th places he achieved were creditable, but are by now worth very little. The prize money went straight through the club and into the pockets of the likes of Beye etc; the European qualifications pissed out of the window against Moscow and Vienna.

As I said in my original post, as none of them won a thing (Houllier probably will not), it's about the legacy they left. 6th place is only worth something if it is a stepping stone to something better; or even merely the chance of something better.

 in my view O'Neil's legacy was the worst, especially when you  take into account the resources and privileged position he enjoyed, certainly in comparison to his two  predecessors,

You may not agree with this, I am not asking you to.

It would have been interesting to have seen what Houllier would have done four years ago with a squad that included Laursen, Mellberg, Barry, Bouma and even Angel, an emerging rather than a knackered Agbonlahor plus of course the odd 100 mill or so to hit the market with.

[Villa'Zawg]

People seem to forget that we took a perfectly respectable 10 points from our first 6 games before Houllier started implementing his changes. If we'd maintained that form throughout this season we would be level on points with Chelsea and Spurs.

Gerard's results record so far is comparable to Billy McNeill's, although a little better since the Sunderland game.

[pauliewalnuts]

...

So if he was poor at coaching and transfer policy and we finished 6th on three consecutive seasons, with the small matter of making our first final and Wembley appearances in 10 years, are you saying he was a genius in all other areas of management to overcome these faults?

Not a genius at all. His was a pragmatic style of football that was sufficient to garner points on a regular basis. Nothing to be sniffed at, but what is that worth today?

The 6th places he achieved were creditable, but are by now worth very little. The prize money went straight through the club and into the pockets of the likes of Beye etc; the European qualifications pissed out of the window against Moscow and Vienna.

As I said in my original post, as none of them won a thing (Houllier probably will not), it's about the legacy they left. 6th place is only worth something if it is a stepping stone to something better; or even merely the chance of something better.

 in my view O'Neil's legacy was the worst, especially when you  take into account the resources and privileged position he enjoyed, certainly in comparison to his two  predecessors,

You may not agree with this, I am not asking you to.

It would have been interesting to have seen what Houllier would have done four years ago with a squad that included Laursen, Mellberg, Barry, Bouma and even Angel, an emerging rather than a knackered Agbonlahor plus of course the odd 100 mill or so to hit the market with.

I can't remember the last time I agreed with a post as much as I agree with this one. Well said, Steve.

[pauliewalnuts]

People seem to forget that we took a perfectly respectable 10 points from our first 6 games before Houllier started implementing his changes. If we'd maintained that form throughout this season we would be level on points with Chelsea and Spurs.

Gerard's results record so far is comparable to Billy McNeill's, although a little better since the Sunderland game.

Six games is hardly a decent sample to base an "if we'd carried on with that form .." argument on, when you're talking about 38 matches.

There were also only five matches in the league prior to Houllier, not six, incidentally. Houllier was on the bench at Wolves.

Why not take the five post Sunderland if you're going to look at small, convenient samples?