Is this what transition looks like?

[Concrete John]

But it would be nice to see some signs that he remains committed to playing an attractive, attacking style, and not resorting to the sort of limited approach we've seen under previous managers (and I'm thinking more of O'Neill than McLeish).

Surely our first half performance against Everton was a clear sign of that?

[TYLER DURDEN]

From the outset i always felt that Lambert would transform us into another Norwich full of hard working players but lacking in any real flair or class and i haven't seen anything yet to suggest otherwise.

He has got the balance of the squad completely wrong with too much youth and not enough experienced quality and thats the main reason why we've struggled throughout his short tenure with us.

Yes he has had limited funding but why spend part of that limited funding on yet another striker when we had other conspicuous weaknesses within the first team such as midfield. Kozak certainly isn't a clone of Benteke so you cannot really say that he is Benteke's understudy.

In total seven strikers on our books if you include loanees Bent and Fonz and it is that poor allocation of funding that might see yet another Villa transitional period fail.

 

 

[Legion]

Good points well made.

[LeeB]

From the outset i always felt that Lambert would transform us into another Norwich full of hard working players but lacking in any real flair or class and i haven't seen anything yet to suggest otherwise.

He has got the balance of the squad completely wrong with too much youth and not enough experienced quality and thats the main reason why we've struggled throughout his short tenure with us.

Yes he has had limited funding but why spend part of that limited funding on yet another striker when we had other conspicuous weaknesses within the first team such as midfield. Kozak certainly isn't a clone of Benteke so you cannot really say that he is Benteke's understudy.

In total seven strikers on our books if you include loanees Bent and Fonz and it is that poor allocation of funding that might see yet another Villa transitional period fail.

 

 

Norwich pissed two divisions and stayed up with ease with a squad of players who'd never played in the league.

Seriously, how can you look at that and say that is the limit of what he'd achieve with us?

The rest of it, well, he needed cover Benteke and the man he wanted became available. He probably needs a bit more time but so lots of players. People go on like it's every last penny we have, but what do they know? Rock all.

I'd bet my arse that there's more available, as long as it's the right player. And the man that will decide that will be Lambert.

He wont spend for the sake of it, and do you know what? It's about fucking time it happened, it's about time we had a manager that manages the club. We are no longer a place to take the piss, it will serve us well.

We are in transition, but we are better than we were. Our results have been better. We could have done with a bit more intensity in recent weeks but it will come.

[brontebilly]

From the outset i always felt that Lambert would transform us into another Norwich full of hard working players but lacking in any real flair or class and i haven't seen anything yet to suggest otherwise.

He has got the balance of the squad completely wrong with too much youth and not enough experienced quality and thats the main reason why we've struggled throughout his short tenure with us.

Yes he has had limited funding but why spend part of that limited funding on yet another striker when we had other conspicuous weaknesses within the first team such as midfield. Kozak certainly isn't a clone of Benteke so you cannot really say that he is Benteke's understudy.

In total seven strikers on our books if you include loanees Bent and Fonz and it is that poor allocation of funding that might see yet another Villa transitional period fail.

Good post. Kozak is already looking a disastrous signing, leaving aside the apt 'makes Crouch look like Van Persie' comment but that money should certainly have been spent on improving the midfield.

Lambert is diabolical at substitutions and the addition of Kozak has made things worse. When in trouble he enacts the Bradford tactics.

[Clampy]

From the outset i always felt that Lambert would transform us into another Norwich full of hard working players but lacking in any real flair or class and i haven't seen anything yet to suggest otherwise.

He has got the balance of the squad completely wrong with too much youth and not enough experienced quality and thats the main reason why we've struggled throughout his short tenure with us.

Yes he has had limited funding but why spend part of that limited funding on yet another striker when we had other conspicuous weaknesses within the first team such as midfield. Kozak certainly isn't a clone of Benteke so you cannot really say that he is Benteke's understudy.

In total seven strikers on our books if you include loanees Bent and Fonz and it is that poor allocation of funding that might see yet another Villa transitional period fail.

Good post. Kozak is already looking a disastrous signing

No he isn't at all.

[Concrete John]

'disastrous signing' - seriously?  At this stage last season Benteke was missing sitters and looked no better than Kozak.

I'd probably go along with the idea money would have been better spent on the midfield, but time will tell.  Once Luna's fit and with Lowton back in the side, don't be surprised to see Bacuna in there and that'll improve us.

[eastie]

Kozak has only had 2 or 3 games so its way too soon to write him off - he is not a target man but I feel would be better alongside benteke in a two man strikeforce on occasions .

Granted the money may perhaps have been better spent on a creative midfielder but Kozak may well prove to be a very decent signing when playing to his strengths .

[Fergal]

I would be fairly happy with a points tally of 50 or more points this season , which should see us around the top 10.

I would snatch your hand of for 42..

[eastie]

I would be fairly happy with a points tally of 50 or more points this season , which should see us around the top 10.

I would snatch your hand of for 42..

If that's your ambition then you can hardly complain about lambert - 42 points means a relegation battle and you would be delighted to finish on 42 - how disappointing

[SamTheMouse]

and frankly if he keeps us in the division without all the panic attacks we all had last year, that will be enough of an achievement in itself

I sincerely hope you're joking?

Not at all. Last year we stayed up by the skin of our teeth, having to rely on other results to go our way. If, this year, we stay up comfortably - i.e. without the 'panic attacks' - then that would represent some improvement. I wouldn't be unhappy with that, provided there was an indication that the upward trend is going to be maintained over future seasons.

[Concrete John]

I would be fairly happy with a points tally of 50 or more points this season , which should see us around the top 10.

I would snatch your hand of for 42..

If that's your ambition then you can hardly complain about lambert - 42 points means a relegation battle and you would be delighted to finish on 42 - how disappointing

We got 41 points last season and are currently 7 points better off compared to  corresponding games.  50 points should be the target, IMO.

[eastie]

I would be fairly happy with a points tally of 50 or more points this season , which should see us around the top 10.

I would snatch your hand of for 42..

If that's your ambition then you can hardly complain about lambert - 42 points means a relegation battle and you would be delighted to finish on 42 - how disappointing

We got 41 points last season and are currently 7 points better off compared to  corresponding games.  50 points should be the target, IMO.

Yes that's what in looking for  too, 50 points will see us around the top 10 and be a decent improvement .

[brontebilly]

Kozak has only had 2 or 3 games so its way too soon to write him off - he is not a target man but I feel would be better alongside benteke in a two man strikeforce on occasions .

Granted the money may perhaps have been better spent on a creative midfielder but Kozak may well prove to be a very decent signing when playing to his strengths .

Who plays wide for us though in this formation? If we go 2 up front, we either need wingers or a trequarista. We have neither.

Thats part of the reason Bent didnt fit but replacing him with Kozak doesnt make any sense. Ive no idea where Helenius is supposed to fit in either. He seems equally as immobile as Kozak in my limited viewings of him thus far.

As TD said the squad is not balanced at all

[Clampy]

There's been a lot of talk about us needing a 'number 10' or that the Kozak money should have been better spent. There's an argument for both but not many people have come up with any names.