So who do you want as the next Villa manager?

[tomd2103]

It has gone quiet about Frank De Boer going to Spurs, so I wonder if we could approach him if the proposed takeover goes through.   

[hilts_coolerking]

I don't think we'd be getting a superstar name just because we're getting new owners, however exciting and apprehensive it is right about now. Whoever comes in will want in the first instance to get some to stability into the playing side of things. That type of manager isn't the ones people have been mentioning. We're going to have to look closer to home. There are not many options open to us really and nobody is a stand out go and get manager that's within our reach. That's why, and I'll be shot down in flames here, I'd go for a Pulis. He's known for making hus defence very hard to play against and his teams are tight and organised. With the attacking options open to him, better than he's had anywhere I think he'd play a system based on the players and that we'd see a good attacking unit with a cohesive attacking front. at worst if it didn't come off we'd still be tight at the back and wouldn't be shipping 3, 4, or 5 goals all too regularly. For that reason, and given that he'd strengthen the back I'd get him in. And as has been said, he's never been relegated. Right now we need one of them.

I sort of agree with that although there must be alternatives in the Pulis mould.  The thing is I don't think it's reasonable to expect that we'll go instantly from relegation fodder to fast, free flowing sexy football.  What we need are two or three unspectacular solid seasons.  I thought Lambert was brought in to do that but he surprised everyone by not being able to.  If we can stabilise first then the exciting stuff can follow and indeed we might be better placed to attract a top drawer manager at that point.

Of course if we end up with a megabucks owner that process might be speeded up considerably.

[Monty]

I think we can stabilise with an approach with more aesthetic potential (without wishing to sound like that guy from The Thick of It). The possession-based thing can be incredibly boring when it's not going well, but can be just as defensively solid just because you have the ball and they don't. I think that approach is a better base from which to develop into sexy rather than Pulisian/Allardycean approach.

[hilts_coolerking]

I think we can stabilise with an approach with more aesthetic potential (without wishing to sound like that guy from The Thick of It). The possession-based thing can be incredibly boring when it's not going well, but can be just as defensively solid just because you have the ball and they don't. I think that approach is a better base from which to develop into sexy rather than Pulisian/Allardycean approach.

True but fuck me with the squad we currently have such aesthetics (and I totally agree with that being the correct ultimate goal) will have to be introduced very very slowly.

[pauliewalnuts]

The absolute worst thing we could do would be to appoint yet another manager from a time gone by.

Pulis has done amazingly by getting Palace to where they finished, yes, but he's done so by adopting old fashioned, typical British manager tactics - running till you sweat your eyeballs out, organisation, aggression, not giving up.

That's great for the situation they were in when he came, but it's really not the basis on which to build a club in the modern era.

If we appointed someone like him, or *shudder* Allardyce, or even Moyes, it would be repeating the mistakes of the past. Get a manager with a proven background in modern training methods and styles of play, and give him two or three years plus some money.

[peter w]

I think we can stabilise with an approach with more aesthetic potential (without wishing to sound like that guy from The Thick of It). The possession-based thing can be incredibly boring when it's not going well, but can be just as defensively solid just because you have the ball and they don't. I think that approach is a better base from which to develop into sexy rather than Pulisian/Allardycean approach.

maybe so but we're nowhere near being able to mend everything straight away. let's get stability first and foremost before but looking for big changes.

[AvFc4eVeR]

Taylor, Atkinson, Little. We were blessed to have a run of managers that all loved the fabric of this great club. Where can we find the next batch? It's been too long.

What's Martin Laursen upto these days??

[Sexual Ealing]

Erm, I'm obviously not a moderator or anything so forgive me, but can we please keep the new manager chat to a minimum when there's a debate about caps ongoing? I shouldn't need to say anything really.

I think caps are mainly for knobheads but there's something about Tony Pulis that tells me I'm safe.

[Monty]

I think we can stabilise with an approach with more aesthetic potential (without wishing to sound like that guy from The Thick of It). The possession-based thing can be incredibly boring when it's not going well, but can be just as defensively solid just because you have the ball and they don't. I think that approach is a better base from which to develop into sexy rather than Pulisian/Allardycean approach.

True but fuck me with the squad we currently have such aesthetics (and I totally agree with that being the correct ultimate goal) will have to be introduced very very slowly.

Or we need a new squad. Very very quickly.

It can be done on a budget, and everyone points to Swansea to show how better style can be done on a budget, but they tend to forget that Swansea were able to hone that style against worse opponents in the lower leagues before they were good enough at it to compete in the Premier League. The style is worth the time put in, and some results are instantly visible, but the whole turnover of the thing does take a little time and we don't have that. So we need new players to help. But I don't think we need that much change. I actually think that would be more stable, because it's long term, than the short term results-football of of a Pulis and an Allardyce. It's visionless, and that's Lambert's main problem as well.

[hilts_coolerking]

The absolute worst thing we could do would be to appoint yet another manager from a time gone by.

Pulis has done amazingly by getting Palace to where they finished, yes, but he's done so by adopting old fashioned, typical British manager tactics - running till you sweat your eyeballs out, organisation, aggression, not giving up.

That's great for the situation they were in when he came, but it's really not the basis on which to build a club in the modern era.

If we appointed someone like him, or *shudder* Allardyce, or even Moyes, it would be repeating the mistakes of the past. Get a manager with a proven background in modern training methods and styles of play, and give him two or three years plus some money.

If we don't get taken over though we're going to need someone effective in charge.  Fuck the aesthetics then, it'll be all about the staying up.  But if that is what happens we might even struggle to attract even a top quality hoof merchant.*

*If that isn't a contradiction in terms.

[Monty]

The absolute worst thing we could do would be to appoint yet another manager from a time gone by.

Pulis has done amazingly by getting Palace to where they finished, yes, but he's done so by adopting old fashioned, typical British manager tactics - running till you sweat your eyeballs out, organisation, aggression, not giving up.

That's great for the situation they were in when he came, but it's really not the basis on which to build a club in the modern era.

If we appointed someone like him, or *shudder* Allardyce, or even Moyes, it would be repeating the mistakes of the past. Get a manager with a proven background in modern training methods and styles of play, and give him two or three years plus some money.

If we don't get taken over though we're going to need someone effective in charge.  Fuck the aesthetics then, it'll be all about the staying up.  But if that is what happens we might even struggle to attract even a top quality hoof merchant.

I'm assuming we get taken over by someone who'll spend even a little more than Lambert. If we don't get taken over I don't think any manager will be able to do any better than scrape us safe.

[pauliewalnuts]

The absolute worst thing we could do would be to appoint yet another manager from a time gone by.

Pulis has done amazingly by getting Palace to where they finished, yes, but he's done so by adopting old fashioned, typical British manager tactics - running till you sweat your eyeballs out, organisation, aggression, not giving up.

That's great for the situation they were in when he came, but it's really not the basis on which to build a club in the modern era.

If we appointed someone like him, or *shudder* Allardyce, or even Moyes, it would be repeating the mistakes of the past. Get a manager with a proven background in modern training methods and styles of play, and give him two or three years plus some money.

If we don't get taken over though we're going to need someone effective in charge.  Fuck the aesthetics then, it'll be all about the staying up.  But if that is what happens we might even struggle to attract even a top quality hoof merchant.*

*If that isn't a contradiction in terms.

If we are going to wind up scuttling around that end of the table, then really, it doesn't matter.

I honestly would rather be in the Championship and playing a bit of watchable football than spend three years chasing 38 points with Allardyce in charge and Kevin Nolan looking for the knock downs from Bowery. I've seen enough mind bogglingly shit football for a lifetime in the last few years.

It's meant to be fun.

[BoskoDjembaSalifou]

Haven't read the whole thread, so has anyone mentioned Guidolin? He'd be my choice.

[pauliewalnuts]

The absolute worst thing we could do would be to appoint yet another manager from a time gone by.

Pulis has done amazingly by getting Palace to where they finished, yes, but he's done so by adopting old fashioned, typical British manager tactics - running till you sweat your eyeballs out, organisation, aggression, not giving up.

That's great for the situation they were in when he came, but it's really not the basis on which to build a club in the modern era.

If we appointed someone like him, or *shudder* Allardyce, or even Moyes, it would be repeating the mistakes of the past. Get a manager with a proven background in modern training methods and styles of play, and give him two or three years plus some money.

If we don't get taken over though we're going to need someone effective in charge.  Fuck the aesthetics then, it'll be all about the staying up.  But if that is what happens we might even struggle to attract even a top quality hoof merchant.

I'm assuming we get taken over by someone who'll spend even a little more than Lambert. If we don't get taken over I don't think any manager will be able to do any better than scrape us safe.

That's true, pretty much.

Lambert should have done better than he has, but let's be honest, if we are lumbered with a Lidl level wages policy, we are never going to amount to much more than we are now. That's easily the most important thing that needs to change, far more important than who is in the manager's seat.

Which is why the whole Lambert in or out argument doesn't really do much for me at the moment. It is just unimportant in comparison to the ownership stuff.

[Toronto Villa]

Haven't read the whole thread, so has anyone mentioned Guidolin? He'd be my choice.

Is he part of the Lute family?