Dean Smith - Confirmed

[Russ aka Big Nose]

Not sacking Dean is a punt - if we’re talking about staying up.

No it's not. It is keeping faith with the long-term strategy of very wealthy owners and the seemingly sensible senior management team that appointed Smith.

Twelve months ago we were a club in a real mess with an average Championship squad populated largely by players coming to the end of their careers who were on big money with no re-sale value.

The new owners have started to transform all aspects of the club and team and promotion was probably an unexpected bonus for many and almost certainly meant another season of Grealish, SJM and Mings.

A new squad with limited PL experience (inevitable given the budget restrictions of FFP and the need to reduce the average age) is clearly a work in progress and, yes, might get relegated.

But ditching the manager and bringing in someone who will want to be backed with new (experienced older/expensive) recruits is a return to a failed approach and a punt as it brings no guarantee of retaining PL status.

[Legion]

Going down would clearly be a disaster and I find the attitude of rather go down and keep Dean than stay up without him utterly bizarre.

I'm not sure anyone has said that.

Yes they have.

You're in panto mode.

He's behind you.

[TonyD]

Not sacking Dean is a punt - if we’re talking about staying up.

No it's not. It is keeping faith with the long-term strategy of very wealthy owners and the seemingly sensible senior management team that appointed Smith.

Twelve months ago we were a club in a real mess with an average Championship squad populated largely by players coming to the end of their careers who were on big money with no re-sale value.

The new owners have started to transform all aspects of the club and team and promotion was probably an unexpected bonus for many and almost certainly meant another season of Grealish, SJM and Mings.

A new squad with limited PL experience (inevitable given the budget restrictions of FFP and the need to reduce the average age) is clearly a work in progress and, yes, might get relegated.

But ditching the manager and bringing in someone who will want to be backed with new (experienced older/expensive) recruits is a return to a failed approach and a punt as it brings no guarantee of retaining PL status.

You can argue to stick with a manager who is not getting the results when you can see what he is trying to achieve and just needs more time and support.
You don’t stick with a manager who is sticking to a blindingly obvious bad strategy,  keeps playing the worst striker in the history of the club on his OWN up front,  plays one of the best midfielders we’ve ever had on the wing in front of dreadful left back,  doesn’t understand what to do with substitutions and has clearly lost the support of the dressing room.

[ChicagoLion]

Going down would clearly be a disaster and I find the attitude of rather go down and keep Dean than stay up without him utterly bizarre.

I'm not sure anyone has said that.

Yes they have.

You're in panto mode.

Oh no I’m not.

[brian green]

Where is that idle boy Wishee Washee?

[TonyD]

He’s behind you.

[Russ aka Big Nose]

Not sacking Dean is a punt - if we’re talking about staying up.

No it's not. It is keeping faith with the long-term strategy of very wealthy owners and the seemingly sensible senior management team that appointed Smith.

Twelve months ago we were a club in a real mess with an average Championship squad populated largely by players coming to the end of their careers who were on big money with no re-sale value.

The new owners have started to transform all aspects of the club and team and promotion was probably an unexpected bonus for many and almost certainly meant another season of Grealish, SJM and Mings.

A new squad with limited PL experience (inevitable given the budget restrictions of FFP and the need to reduce the average age) is clearly a work in progress and, yes, might get relegated.

But ditching the manager and bringing in someone who will want to be backed with new (experienced older/expensive) recruits is a return to a failed approach and a punt as it brings no guarantee of retaining PL status.

You can argue to stick with a manager who is not getting the results when you can see what he is trying to achieve and just needs more time and support.
You don’t stick with a manager who is sticking to a blindingly obvious bad strategy,  keeps playing the worst striker in the history of the club on his OWN up front,  plays one of the best midfielders we’ve ever had on the wing in front of dreadful left back,  doesn’t understand what to do with substitutions and has clearly lost the support of the dressing room.

As per my original post - fervently expressed opinions are still opinions and not facts or evidence. Out of necessity we bought potential rather than proven quality.

So some recruited are raw but will adjust and become established PL players (hopefully at Villa), some will take a while but will also get there and some will not.

Other than Jota, who was a makeweight to get Gardner off the payroll, I'm not resigned to any of the recruits being marked as 'not good enough' YET (reference Amavi, Veretout and others binned or written off to soon).

I would agree that Grealish needs to play in a central role, but the stick Wesley gets is (in my view) a result of him being singled out by some as this season's Neil Taylor. He is raw, sometimes ungainly but there is a player there struggling for decent service and players being close enough to link up with.

And as for Targett being dreadful - given the players picked at LB in recent seasons, he is far from the worst we have had there.

Personally I would go 3-5-2 to make better use of the players available but that is a different discussion (albeit puzzling that it is not something Smith has tried).

[Risso]

And as for Targett being dreadful - given the players picked at LB in recent seasons, he is far from the worst we have had there.

Great, £14m and the best defence anybody can muster is that Targett isn't as bad as Tony Moon.

[Lastfootstamper]

If a disinterested but knowledgeable party could be found to cast a critical eye over a list of our player turnover post-Bent, I think they'd be amazed we were currently a top division side. I remember someone musing on here a good while back on when was the last time we bought someone at, or close to, the height of their powers?

[N'ZMAV]

when was the last time we bought someone at, or close to, the height of their powers?

[PeterWithesShin]

If a disinterested but knowledgeable party could be found to cast a critical eye over a list of our player turnover post-Bent, I think they'd be amazed we were currently a top division side. I remember someone musing on here a good while back on when was the last time we bought someone at, or close to, the height of their powers?

Tom Heaton.

[cdbearsfan]

Heaton, Mings, Engels, Targett, Trezeguet, El Ghazi, Hause, Guilbert off the top of my head. None of them were signed as young kids nor are they in the twilight of their career (assuming Heaton can carry on until late thirties/early forties as is common with goalkeepers).

[N'ZMAV]

If a disinterested but knowledgeable party could be found to cast a critical eye over a list of our player turnover post-Bent, I think they'd be amazed we were currently a top division side. I remember someone musing on here a good while back on when was the last time we bought someone at, or close to, the height of their powers?

Tom Heaton.

a good signing

[Mister E]

As per my original post - fervently expressed opinions are still opinions and not facts or evidence. Out of necessity we bought potential rather than proven quality.

So some recruited are raw but will adjust and become established PL players (hopefully at Villa), some will take a while but will also get there and some will not.

Other than Jota, who was a makeweight to get Gardner off the payroll, I'm not resigned to any of the recruits being marked as 'not good enough' YET (reference Amavi, Veretout and others binned or written off to soon).

I would agree that Grealish needs to play in a central role, but the stick Wesley gets is (in my view) a result of him being singled out by some as this season's Neil Taylor. He is raw, sometimes ungainly but there is a player there struggling for decent service and players being close enough to link up with.

And as for Targett being dreadful - given the players picked at LB in recent seasons, he is far from the worst we have had there.

Personally I would go 3-5-2 to make better use of the players available but that is a different discussion (albeit puzzling that it is not something Smith has tried).

I pretty much support these opinions, although Trez would have to make massive improvements before I could regard him as up to snuff.
My greatest concerns are that Smith (a) rates Lansbury, (b) seems not to be able to see what many others do, that a change in set-up is required, and (c) is not dealing with the drop in morale that seems evident.
I won't mention my usual comments about fitness, ball retention and dynamisim.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

And as for Targett being dreadful - given the players picked at LB in recent seasons, he is far from the worst we have had there.

Great, £14m and the best defence anybody can muster is that Targett isn't as bad as Tony Moon.

The price rises to £17m with add-ons.