Next Manager Speculation and wishful thinking thread

[sickbeggar]

Gerrard would raise our profile, no doubt about that which could be the thinking behind it. Would need to be backed to the hilt though to attract the sort of players maybe Smith couldn't.

Genuine question - Joe aside, would a footballer really want to choose Gerrard over say West Ham, Spurs, Arsenal etc - who we want to be competing with? 

My concern is, the way the clubs is run, a lot of key decisions aren't made by the manager, or at least not alone - so I think that limits us to a Head Coach type manager.

I think some of these appointments in coaching an recruitment were force on Dean to some degree

Probably not given the choice, but if you outbid them then maybe you'd come to us for an extra 40k a week which the others won't pay.

I don't know how much clout gerrard would have to be honest but if the board sanctioned 25m for a midfielder in January, but wouldn't give Smith that money, then he's got an advantage straight away. Doesn't stop him buying the wrong guy or not coaching him as well as Smith though.

Oh he'd raise our profile alright, but I'm pretty certain it would be for all the wrong reasons.

yeah I don't want him. I'm just saying you'd think Gerrard would only come if the funds were in place because otherwise he's better off staying put. Someone like Hasenhuttl just says "surviving on a budget and selling your best player to Man City every 3 years".

[Monty]

Terry was working under an experienced coach. Gerrard...I mean, I'd love to be wrong, but my first reaction is that it's basically embarrassing, small time starfuckery.

[Risso]

Terry was working under an experienced coach. Gerrard...I mean, I'd love to be wrong, but my first reaction is that it's basically embarrassing, small time starfuckery.

Gerrard did a year coaching at Liverpool under Klopp didn't he?

[danno]

Honestly Gerrard can get in the bin and anybody at board room level considering that utter stain for even a fraction of a second should pause take a moment, and then choose one of our many canals to throw themselves in.

Oh wow he's done well in Scotland has he?  Let's get Neil Lennon then he's won even more.

[Monty]

But I wouldn't want Terry either, is my point. Being some coach somewhere, obviously sentimentally appointed, does not make you qualified for a high-profile but difficult job.

[wolfman999]

Comments apparently emerginig from Liverpool fans this morning, suggestiing that a move to Villa would be the ideal stepping stone for Stevie G before taking over at their club, are all the reason why this would be a bad, bad appointment. I want someone who understands the dna of my club, not just someone looking to add to their CV.

[Ads]

Smiths weakness was being streaky. It was either feast or famine and that absence of positive consistency was something he could never really improve on, be it in the Championship or top flight with our best squad in a decade.

The new manager will need a greater appreciation of the tactical side and the small details of organisation, especially in midfield.

The defensive structure and attacking structure was too ad hoc.

[algy]

I think every single one of us doesn't want Gerrard for the very reason it's using is to get to Liverpool.

The question is, if getting us into Europe gets him that job, is that a sufficient trade off while we climb the ladder.

I don't.  I don't want Gerrard because the sum total of his managerial career today is a moderate amount of domestic success with "Rangers".  Which is nowhere near enough to get work as a kitchen porter at Villa Park, let alone the gaffer's job.

Talk of Brendan Rodgers seems a bit fanciful.  I think we'd have more success trying to poach managers who aren't currently at a Premier League club, simply because we can offer them a wage & transfer budget that they'll only see at maybe half a dozen clubs outside the Premier League.

I'd go all out for ten Hag, with Favre as a backup option.  I think we'd get one of them.  If we were going for a British manager - and I can see the logic in that with it being a mid-season appointment - then for me Graham Potter is the stand out candidate.  None of the other names being bandied about really do anything for me.

[Rigadon]

If Spurs can get Conte, I'd ask why Villa couldn't get somebody of that ilk too.  I'm optimistic today that we're going to be pleasantly surprised with who ends up holding a scarf aloft.

[pauliewalnuts]

"Gerrard has done well with Rangers"

[chrisw1]

I think they will want someone who will give some of the youth a go. There's not really an outstanding candidate is there?

Lampard would tick that box.  Not my favoured choice, but probably not as bad as some suggest.  He's also done his Chelsea thing, so that wouldn't be hanging over him as much as it would Terry or Liverpool with Gerrard.

I'd love it to be Rogers, but I don't think there's a chance he would shelve Leicester for us.  People talk about us having far more potential, but they also have rich owners and are looking at a stadium expansion.  It may be that Rogers just wouldn't see it that way right now.

[sickbeggar]

In the face of literally no other gettable decent target, I'd go for Favre too. Not that I know anything about him apart from what I've seen on here

[cdbearsfan]

"Gerrard has done well with Rangers"

Point of order: Gerrard hasn't done that well. It would actually be a less sensible appointment than McLeish was.

[Monty]

Another worry with hiring someone like Gerrard - how badly would he have to do before we'd fire him? People already think we're jumped up for letting Dean go after a very disappointing year, and an appointment like Gerrard would show that they care very deeply about what people think. Someone like Gerrard, perceived as being bigger than the club? We'd have to be bottom before they pulled the trigger.

[Rigadon]

"Gerrard has done well with Rangers"

It isn't Halloween anymore.