Poll - Sherwood - got rid

[kippaxvilla2]

The Telegraph story reports the meeting as fact and clearly includes Sherwood's response/justification off-the-record. Sherwood is positioning to defend himself by saying these weren't his signings, but I seem to recall him taking credit for them at the time.

Edit: I'd also like to know which summer signings he'll get 'ruthless' with. Which have been given a chance but have underperformed? The issue seems less the underperformance of new signings, and more the lack of continuity in the line-up and strategy.

I agree these stories aren't just coincidental - something is happening. Good.

On the signing of Amavi.

Manager Tim Sherwood said: "I'm delighted to have secured the services of someone we consider to be a terrific young player.

"Jordan has been one of the outstanding players in Ligue 1 and is still very young and can become even better.

"There were a lot of clubs after him this summer so we are really pleased to welcome him to the Club."

[Eigentor]

Well, I'm not arguing that we should have signed players purely based on the criteria of whether they had PL experience or not, and ignoring attributes such as fitness, quality and motivation. In that case I would have been claiming that it is a damn shame that we missed out on Adebayor, but I'm not.

[Eigentor]

Also: Sinclair, Richards and Lescott do fit into the "unspectacular, but supposedly PL quality standard" category, but have so far this season not been shining lights.

[passitsideways]

Well, I'm not arguing that we should have signed players purely based on the criteria of whether they had PL experience or not, and ignoring attributes such as fitness, quality and motivation. In that case I would have been claiming that it is a damn shame that we missed out on Adebayor, but I'm not.

Isn't that the point though? It's ultimately down to how good a player is; whether or not they have PL experience is absolutely immaterial. Plus, you have to pay for the privilege of PL experience: if player A and player B were identical in every way except that player B had PL experience, player B would cost more on the market. For example, Clyne cost Liverpool 12.5 million, and he's arguably about as much of a prospect as Amavi is, who cost 9 million. Gana, a player of similar quality to Delph, cost us 9 million, but Delph undoubtedly would have cost more than that amount without a release clause which we probably had no choice but to insert. Then there's the issue of wages. Even with our sales, we didn't really have enough money to buy multiple players who could tick both boxes; and when you can only choose one, you'd always take the quality. That's what I'm trying to say.

[Stu]

The Rodgers talk concerns me.

He hardly flourished at Liverpool, and they appear to have a similar player acquisition method to us, except he had vastly superior financial resources to hand. How is he going to live with the same thing at the Villa, with lesser players?

Other than that, he comes across as a sort of dull David Brent and speaks a lot of management cliche bollocks.

[Percy McCarthy]

The Rodgers talk concerns me.

He hardly flourished at Liverpool, and they appear to have a similar player acquisition method to us, except he had vastly superior financial resources to hand. How is he going to live with the same thing at the Villa, with lesser players?

Other than that, he comes across as a sort of dull David Brent and speaks a lot of management cliche bollocks.

Agreed. One thing he has over Sherwood though is (I imagine) he will have a plan. Even if it's a crap one.

[barrysleftfoot]

 If you judge a manager by his signings, then Sherwood is a better manager than Rodgers imho.

 There is a good team down there atm, i just wish he would play Sanchez as a deep lying central defensive midfielder, and protect the 2 vulnerable CHs.

[barrysleftfoot]

 I think, to be fair to Sherwood, Perce, he has a plan.I think he wanted a more mobile CF than Gestade, hence our links with Embolo, and Islam, and a better CH, linked with a good SAmerican, and the guy from Monaco, but he wasn't given that amount.

 If i'm honest, i'm not bothered if Sherwood stays or goes, but not Rodgers, very overrated imo.

[Eigentor]

I don't agree that PL experience is absolutely immaterial. If you sign a player without PL experience, there is a higher risk that he won't adapt to the league, the country etc, or at least will take some time to adapt. In the meantime, performances will be uneven.

The point I was trying to make is that Villa is a team that finished 17th last season (ie, was almost relegated) and subsequently lost its two best players. In such a situation it's not unreasonable to make risk mitigation a priority, even at the cost of long term prosperity. One such risk mitigating measure might be to sign unspectacular players with PL experience who is likely to need little time adapting to the team. As opposed to more talented players who need time to adapt while the team cements a place in the relegation zone.

[Monty]

I think, to be fair to Sherwood, Perce, he has a plan.I think he wanted a more mobile CF than Gestade, hence our links with Embolo, and Islam, and a better CH, linked with a good SAmerican, and the guy from Monaco, but he wasn't given that amount.

 If i'm honest, i'm not bothered if Sherwood stays or goes, but not Rodgers, very overrated imo.

Rodgers may be overrated but he is at least an actual manager.

[rafter]

It's strange that when we took Sherwood on he was 46 years old and only had about 6 months managerial experience.
Just for comparison Lambert is the same age but has had 10 years as a manager,
and Brendan Rogers is 4 years younger and has had 7 years managerial experience.
Why do you think that Sherwood hasn't been 'head hunted' before now???

[passitsideways]

I don't agree that PL experience is absolutely immaterial. If you sign a player without PL experience, there is a higher risk that he won't adapt to the league, the country etc, or at least will take some time to adapt. In the meantime, performances will be uneven.

The point I was trying to make is that Villa is a team that finished 17th last season (ie, was almost relegated) and subsequently lost its two best players. In such a situation it's not unreasonable to make risk mitigation a priority, even at the cost of long term prosperity. One such risk mitigating measure might be to sign unspectacular players with PL experience who is likely to need little time adapting to the team. As opposed to more talented players who need time to adapt while the team cements a place in the relegation zone.

I guess we're talking in circles here, but I'm sure that's exactly the logic behind what QPR and Hull did, to solidify their positions by signing what were allegedly "risk mitigating" players. The argument just feels to me like something that gets parroted because it seems like it should make sense, not because there's undeniable evidence to support it actually working out in practice.

[N'ZMAV]

There's no smoke without fire - I'm starting to think he'll get the boot.

[Eigentor]

I guess we're talking in circles here, but I'm sure that's exactly the logic behind what QPR and Hull did, to solidify their positions by signing what were allegedly "risk mitigating" players. The argument just feels to me like something that gets parroted because it seems like it should make sense, not because there's undeniable evidence to support it actually working out in practice.

It's difficult to find undeniable evidence to support anything in a rather evasive discussion. There are many reasons why a club gets relegated; the quality and experience of players are just two of them. But just as QPR and Hull got relegated with a lot of PL-experienced players, teams like Everton seem to do well by signing the outcasts of top teams. I don't think there are conclusive evidence either way.

[Legion]

Metro article