weedman

I think you mistook my point, by foresight I meant planning for the medium to long term, rather than short. Say we get a Steve Bruce type in again, I'd have little doubt that we'd see an improvement in the results, he'd bring in a certain type of player to solidify us (experienced players) and get good results in the short term. However 2 years down the line those experienced players are old has beens, so we have to release them and bring in more experienced players to continue playing the same way. It's an endless cycle that costs an absolute fortune while bringing in extremely little, therefore completely unsustainable in the medium to long term. This is literally what we have done since Randy first bought the club, where has it got us? A few good years finishing 6th followed by a decade of abject misery and embarrassment. A dinosaur isn't someone that "plays defensive football" it's someone that comes in, brings a short term boost before bailing and/or getting sacked just as the bust comes. That's the sort of manager we don't want. I would rather go down with Dean Smith than see Villa appoint another "dinosaur", even if it kept us up this year

There is clearly a difference between having 15 players leave on a free transfer because they're all way past their prime and needing to spend £120m replacing them and selling maybe 6 players for £100-150m which we can reinvest in the team. That's the reason people don't want a dinosaur. No-one denies that the players brought in generally do well, it's the lack of foresight that's the issue. It's completely unsustainable to have to completely rebuild every couple of years while bringing in zero transfer money

He might not want to work for 3 years, but he absolutely will want to earn 3 years worth of salary. Any manager taking over now will demand a 3 year contract for the simple point that they'll probably be sacked well before then and take the compensation

Such a shame Steve Bruce never had a transfer window here so he could have replaced some of our older players with his own men. I'd bet he'd have turned his nose up at expensive short term fixes and really helped to mould us into a PL ready team. Guess we'll never know how that would have turned out

I'm thinking Drinkwater is key to this whole season. On loan at Burnley when Burnley looked like the worst team in the league, he leaves and they go back to good old hoofball Burnley back in comfortable mid table. He comes to Villa and we've arguably become the worst team in the league, hopefully he buggers off and as an apology starts hanging around Watford or West Hams training ground

This is demonstrably false. They've smashed club records in terms of transfer spending this season. In years gone by the likes of Benrahma would be playing for a different team now. They are a club who has been well run for years and built to the point of finally having a crack at promotion this season. Their manager is doing very well, but let's not pretend he's working under the same constraints as Dean did. There is absolutely loads to beat Dean Smith with at the moment, there's no need to attempt to discredit his entire management career

I do think the majority of players we complain about are the older ones, obviously everyone wants the young ones to improve, but they don't play because we play the older players because they're on 60k a week and can't be left on the bench. We tend to keep these players, not playing or being loaned out, until they're in their early 20's then they have to rebuild their career in the lower leagues. It's not the coaching that's wrong, it's the lack of game time because we need instant success. A Freddie Guilbert or a Wesley get written off in their first 6 months with us so we can play someone like Elmo, even Samatta is at his peak and very unlikely to improve and not many would want Wesley playing ahead of him. We lambast young players for being inconsistent, demand that older, more experienced players are played in their place then get surprised when the young players don't develop until they leave us The likes of Cahill and Albrighton left because they weren't starters, we played Zat Knight and I don't remember who ahead of them, it's a recurring theme. We blow our budget on old players at the cost of the youth, it'd classic short termism. We sold Nathan Baker to sign John Terry. I don't think Baker would have been a world beater or anything, and I don't think he could have been considered young, but last season when we were playing an injured Chester and Jedinak at CB we could have used him. Us signing players on the decline because they're a little bit better now or a little bit more consistent now is why none of our youth players seem to develop. Jack was fairly quickly changed from promising youth player making his debut to first name on the team sheet. He absolutely blossomed with the pressure and the minutes. He wasn't great at first in the championship, but regular game time saw him grow into the best player in the league. He wasn't the best at first in the PL, but regular game time has seen him grow into one of the best players. Give the likes of Luiz, Nakamba, Wesley, Guilbert, Konsa etc regular game time and we'll reap the benefits in the future, in the past we'd have a load of players in their late 20's or early 30's playing those positions, finish comfortably mid table and complain that none of our younger players are improving. Sure, mid table would be great, but if you consistently buy rather than develop players eventually you'll get it wrong and go down, and you'll never improve beyond mid table.

On the first bold point - I think the reason that so many signings have failed to improve over the last 10 years is simple, we sign players on the decline. We have consistently wasted money on 28-35 year olds who are either at the peak already or on the way down. Coaching won't improve these players any more, they've peaked already. I can barely remember ever having a balance between youth and experience, we either pretty much sign all kids, who go on to get relegated and all leave before we see any improvement, or all pensioners, who seem to keep getting worse until they're stuck in our reserve teams on 60k a week waiting to retire. Ironically this year we've actually struck a decent balance I think, but our budget was stretched so thin we may still end up relegated from it and have to start again. I do however have a lot of faith that the current owners will get us back up eventually The 2nd bit in bold is something that will come from experience, not 100% of the time of course, but in most players tracking far post runners and being wary of cut backs etc are just a few of the things that you get more accustomed to the more you play. Ashley Cole is one of the best full backs the countries ever had and he was terrible at defending until his late 20's, Trent Alexander Arnold is being hit with the "can't defend" stuff as well this season. I'm sure Guilbert will improve as he gains experience, this is still his 1st season at this kind of level

Just out of interest, have you forgotten that the horrendous short termism of our last owners and managers left us needing to buy an entire team this summer? Just wondering, because suggesting we need players like Enda Stevens, who was absolutely awful for us however many years ago and has needed the best part of a decade in the lower leagues to become the player he is now seems crazy to me. What are you suggesting? That we go back in time several years to pick up some players on the cheap that will be coming good this season? We've basically signed a load of Enda Stevens this summer, younger players that should improve as the years go on. It's what we should have done when we first got relegated but instead Xia helped by Wyness and Bruce decided to go ultra short term and signed all players with so sell on value and massive wages. Smith and NSWE are trying to correct the mistakes of the past, while also keep us competitive. Guilbert is inconsistent but to me is 10x the player Stevens was when he was at Villa. Full backs in 2020 get caught out of position, its what happens. They are almost considered attackers these days. Elmo simply isn't athletic enough to be a starting full back at this level. He works better as a winger where he's experienced enough to know when to cover and can still put in a devastating cross now and then. I like Guilbert, he's inconsistent and can be frustrating but he's young and you can see his quality. He'll become more consistent and an all round better player in time (just like Stevens) and as things stand there's no better option in our squad IMO. I suppose for the same price we could have signed a more battle ready player but how much did he cost, a few million? To get a ready to go player for that they'd have to be in their mid thirties and would leave us in the exact same position a year down the line.

Look again, I agree with a lot of what you say, we do have issues, defending is a big one, I think that's at least in part down to a fairly ineffective midfield, which has obviously not been aided by the long term injury to our main player in that position. And again, all I am trying to say is that it is very conceivable that we could finish exactly where you or I predicted we would be in spite of these issues that we clearly have. That's not saying I don't care about them, that's not saying I don't think we should ever look to improve our defending, and defending, like attacking, isn't just about defenders or attackers, it's about the whole team - the balance is critical and obviously we pretty much had to build our entire team in 1 transfer window so, and this may be where our expectations differ, I accept that there will be certain issues with the team balance as a result of that, you do not. That explains our difference in opinion here I feel. I believe that certain problems or issues with our team were inevitable this season, and that's why I anticipated that we'd struggle and I would have taken 17th at the start of the season. Its not that I don't care about them, it's not that I never want them solved, it's not that I think we can concede 300 goals a season and be ok. Again I'll reiterate that no team finishes 17th (or 15th, as per your prediction) while playing consistently well, it simply doesn't happen. Teams that finish that low will all have issues, ours is an ineffective midfield and leaky defence, Newcastles (as an example) is virtually no goal threat despite their having spent as much on attackers as we've spent on our whole team. Norwich and Brighton are similar to ourselves really but Brighton probably have a bit more nous. Watford are an anti football team of thugs that only know how to bully teams and fall apart when that doesn't work. I could go on but the point is there. The issues we have are well documented, and I personally don't think we need reminding of them every few hours for the entire season, these things take time to fix, fix one problem and it can create another just as easily. We built virtually our whole team in 1 transfer window so I don't think it makes me such an horrendous fan or someone blissfully oblivious to any issues As for the Palace and Sheff Utd mentions as well, they both have good defences, and while I've never "preached" about how long either have been in the division, it's not about time in this division, rather than time as the team playing together. Both have been built up with little bits added here and there over the last several years, we were effectively cobbled together in 1 transfer window

I'm sorry, you can't say you'd expect us to finish around 15th then get all upset when we finish 16th because you need us to exceed your expectations to be satisfied. If you read what I wrote you'll see that I never once accused you of "unconditionally criticising", I simply said that you have been vocally critical despite the fact that with minor strokes of luck here and there we'd be where you expected us to be with no real difference in our play We all accept that ideally we want us to be winning every game, challenging for the title and winning champions leagues, but I personally don't think it's fair to judge or criticise the team based on those expectations, because they're completely unrealistic at this stage. This season our expectations were "battle against relegation" and even in your case "hope to finish around 15th", given that we are currently in a relegation battle and very close to your target despite a turbulent time losing the spine of our team I just don't think it warrants the virtually zero positivity and relentless, daily criticism from you. We are, at worst, very close to where you thought we'd be. You talk every day about expecting us to stop the opponents threat, sieze the initiative in the games, not concede silly goals, dominate the ball etc, and not just every now and then (as we've done) but regularly and consistently, do you realise if we did that we'd probably be 4th this year, not the 15th you expected. Criticism is good, I'm generally positive and if everyone was like that it'd be boring on here but come on, you can't expect us to basically be Liverpool all season while also saying "I expect us to finish 15th". To finish 15th you have to be pretty bad, inconsistent, either not score enough or conceded too many, have a few glaring weaknesses etc. It was never going to be all rosy this season, whichever way you predicted it would go

You say that but if we win our game in hand we'd be 15th, clear of the bottom 3 and within 1 place of where you'd be happy with, despite a turbulent season where we lost the spine of our team to injuries for long periods, and yet you've been very vocally dissatisfied with our performance this season. My point is I don't think our performances over the season would have been noticeably different if we had 1 more victory or 3 more draws. I mean, take the point Kevin Friend stole from us at Palace (literally the worst decision I've ever seen a referee make) and the last minute pen we should have had at arsenal if VAR had been awake and that's 2 of them right there which we would have had the refereeing been adequate. I know it's and buts, but I don't think it's inconceivable that we have 3-6 more points without any noticeable difference in our play over the course of the season. We'd be on target for your prediction, but I'd imagine you'd still be expecting more from our performances as they'd be basically the same. That's why I think some of the criticism, though valid, comes across very harshly because it we consistently did all the things you and a few others preach we do we would be nowhere near the bottom 3, which we all agree is an unrealistic expectation of the team at this time

I think the issue is that many were "happy" to finish 17th this season, but mostly expecting it to come without ever really playing badly. Expecting us to play well most games and maybe get unlucky here and there, finish a comfortable 17th having never seriously worried about going down add 2 £50m players in the summer and challenge for the top 6 The reality is that to finish 17th in the PL you have to consistently play badly. The likes of West Ham and Newcastle remind me of us under Lambert, seemingly don't win forever, eventually snatch a win and look at the table they're clear of relegation zone. Even I remember saying to myself in those days, "jeez how bad are the bottom 3 to be below us?" People generally knew that it wouldn't be easy this year, but I don't think were prepared for what struggling would entail, mainly due to our "struggling" in the Championship seeing us comfortably mid table at worst, and we were all quite used to that. We may go down, I'll admit it's been much more tough than I was anticipating and I was part of the "happy with 17th" crowd, but there's a long way to go and a lot will happen between now and the West Ham game. Hopefully now the distraction of the final is gone will see the players put in a bit more fight. I can't remember the team but I'm sure a while ago someone was really struggling after getting into Europa League and were around the bottom 3 all season until they were knocked out and suddenly surged up the table once that distraction was over. I could be misremembering that though as I have only a vague recollection of it!

This 140m figure is thrown around all the time with no thought that about 1/3 of that was just turning loans into signings, and we were still left with only 1 winger, no striker, 1 CM (who's spent most of the season injured), 3 CB (one of them was Hause and one was crocked), only Nyland and Steer as keeping options. The only saving grace in the summer was we had a Grealish After turning what loans were available into permanent signings we had about 100m to spend and we needed a full team plus backups. It was always going to be a monumental task. We had no choice but to gamble, signing ready made prem players in their prime would have cost us triple what we spent simply due to the numbers we needed. Its very easy in hindsight to say we shouldn't have bought x or y, but truth was we simply didnt know how they would adapt to the league, and all other options in our price bracket were the same. You think if we hadn't signed Trez we'd have signed a Benrahma or Bowen? They cost double Trez, if it wasn't him it would have been another £10m gamble. Same goes for basically all our players. We can baulk at wanting Elmo as an option despite the spend, but we spent a total of £0 on right backs this summer (Steve Bruce would be turning in his grave if he were dead), and only have 2 actual wingers in the team. We could have bought more I guess, but turn rather than the 2x £10m gambles we did sign we'd be looking at 4x £5m gambles, and I'm not sure that would have worked out any better. Dunno what I'm rambling about really, Elmo is a decent option and I don't think that says anything whatsoever about our transfer business this season

Here we go

Guarantee if he had rolled off the pitch injured for us to lose the ball and be countered with a man less he'd be absolutely slaughtered on here for it. Imagine if we'd conceded a goal while playing with 10 because he decided to take himself off the pitch rather than wait for treatment? He'd be absolutely crucified for it, without a doubt

I think the wages thing is done as an average. FFP only allows your average wage to go up by a certain % each year. So we couldn't go out and suddenly offer 10 players 200k a week to come here like City did when they were taken over. Think he's saying regardless of money we can only raise the wage bill slowly over several years

I love this angle because 1, that swerve, and 2, big Mile's reaction

This. The instructions that all players receive when they come on are set piece ones. Sometimes you also see the manager have a word as well and those will be more tactical/motivational things I'd assume but set pieces are so important you can't have one player trying to figure out what to do on the fly anymore

I still don't get it, if Danny Drinkwater is going to be playing why not just retain Glenn Whelan in the summer? He's twice the player of DD and much more mobile even at 47 or however old he is now, and on half the wages to boot

If he gets the ball in 20 yards of space under no pressure he is generally capable of passing to the closest villa player to him, usually the CBs but occasionally another midfielder. That's about the best I can say about him

I think he looked out on his feet at kick off. Think the warm up finished him off

If I didn't know anything about football, and, at the start of the game someone had told me that he was a 45 year old having his testimonial I'd have believed it watching him play. He must be the slowest professional player I've ever seen in any sport, I'm pretty sure darts players have more of a turn of speed than this guy. I'm 35 years old with a crocked knee and I'm pretty sure if you put me in that midfield I'd do no worse. I cannot see anything that he offers, he's unbearably slow, both running and reacting, constantly behind the play, incapable of passing forwards, no matter what time or space he has he can only muster a pass back to one of the CBs. Even then put him under pressure he'd still mess up the pass. I'm usually pretty positive, but I'm absolutely baffled how this guy keeps getting in the team, I'm sure he used to be good, but he is possibly the worst player I've ever seen in the Villa midfield and I include utter tripe like Sylla in that, at least Sylla wasn't an automatic starter costing us points every week Cancel his loan, send him back to his London retirement home to keep milking them for money until he actually retires at the end of his contract

I can't understand why Messi and Ronaldo haven't joined my Sunday league team yet, who do they think they are?!