Next Manager Speculation and wishful thinking thread

[PeterWithe]

Dean Smith had never managed in the Premier league, never had the pressure of managing a big club, but virtually everyone welcomed him with open arms. Was it because he was a Villa fan?

I don’t think it was, I can’t bring to mind posts advocating we get him on that basis, in fact he probably wasn’t the outstanding choice at the time. He certainly got a lot of goodwill and patience once he was here though, probably because of his background.

Once announced he was welcomed because he’d overachieved at Brentford, done well despite having to constantly sell his better players to make ends meet yet still kept them competitive, and played us off the park whenever we met. He looked a progressive appointment after Bruce. And it was a great appointment.

Whereas Lambert, appointed for the same reasons, wasn’t.

[paul_e]

Every appointment is an unknown quantity but you try to pick someone who has a better chance of being a success. Gerrard is in the mix purely because of his name and his links with Purslow. His CV wouldn't get him through the door without those 2 things. If he comes in he'll get my backing but until then he is a poor choice that tge vast majority of fans don't want. That adds a lot of extra pressure, just like it did with McLeish, and Gerrard the player didn't often shine under pressure.

[chrisw1]

I've been moaning quite a lot about the appointment of Gerrard.  Then I reminded myself when the same thing happened with Steve McClaren and the club did a u-turn and turned up with McLeish.

Overall, I think there's a chance Gerrard could do well.  He has a highly regarded coach in his backroom team and he seems to have Rangers playing decent football (I know, I know, I'm clutching here).  I don't think he's particularly qualified for the job, but maybe we've sounded out the likes of Ten Hag and been pushed back?

It does feel like a lazy appointment to me and I think we should be more ambitious.  But it may not be a disaster, top managers have to start somewhere and we may get lucky.  The Liverpool thing doesn't bother really nor does his association with Rangers.  He may also be more of a draw for attracting players than some other names suggested.

Overall I'd be dissapointed but still a little excited to see what we can do.  If we do appoint him them I'm all in and 100% behind him.  And if people want to call him Stevie G, who fucking cares if he gets us playing some decent football and up the league?

[Ads]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

You have to be careful what you wish for and for some on here advocating that Smith be sacked embarrassingly for nearly 2 years is gerrard your answer? Really?
Everything about gerrard is wrong and I worry again for AVFC if purslow thinks otherwise.

[chrisw1]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

I'm not making an equivalence, just recalling when the club seemingly listened to fan opinion and turned up with an even worse option.

[London Villan]

We were also 18th in the championship when Dean was appointed, not in our third season in the PL. His remit was very different.

[chrisw1]

And I think I'd prefer him to the Danish coach for example who seems spectacularly unqualified for a PL job.

[Demitri_C]

I am not advocating that we should go for fat Frank but surely Lanpard with, a track record of introducing young players, experience of managing in the Premier League, including earning a Champions league place with that young team and then, signing players that formed the basis of the team that Tuchel won the Champions league with would be the better option.  The only thing he doesn't have is being Purslows mate.

And before you shout me down please read again I am NOT advocating Lampard just making a comparison

If your failing with players of chelseas calibre you simply are not a good manager. That chelsea team was awful under Lampard.

Lampard would be worse than Gerrard in my opinion

[Beard82]

The point for me is we’re meant to be ambitious. 

Percy said the list would be.

This isn’t ambitious

This isn’t we’ll thought out

This is taking a huge gamble when we don’t need to

This says to me the Dream of becoming an elite club is just CP bullshit

[paul_e]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

For me the equivalence is how many fans are against them from the start. McLeish was never accepted by a big chunk of the fanbase and I think Gerrard would have the same problem.

[aev]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

For me the equivalence is how many fans are against them from the start. McLeish was never accepted by a big chunk of the fanbase and I think Gerrard would have the same problem.

Maybe, but I am not sure this place is representative of all fans.

[Ian.]

I suppose Rafa isn't pulling up any trees at Everton, nor did Ancelotti and Koeman. That's some big names. Mourinho has pretty much failed everywhere since he made his name, the much fabled Bielsa isn't making Leeds much better than last season.

Whoever we get is no guarantee.

I must admit the only nagging feeling I have with Gerrard is the circus with the Liverpool connection.

[paul_e]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

For me the equivalence is how many fans are against them from the start. McLeish was never accepted by a big chunk of the fanbase and I think Gerrard would have the same problem.

Maybe, but I am not sure this place is representative of all fans.

Not just here, almost everywhere you look the concensus is that he's a bad choice, for a number of reasons.

[aev]

I don't see the equivalence with McLiesh. Being relegated at Small Heath in your previous gig is an appalling measure what makes you good enough to manage us.

For me the equivalence is how many fans are against them from the start. McLeish was never accepted by a big chunk of the fanbase and I think Gerrard would have the same problem.

Maybe, but I am not sure this place is representative of all fans.

Not just here, almost everywhere you look the concensus is that he's a bad choice, for a number of reasons.

I have seen plenty of support for him on social media, and listened to various phone ins that have been positive.