Isa Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Pl must be doing a great job to have us overachiving in 11th? This time next week we could be three points off the drop-zone. I still think it is a bit early to declare whether we are overacheiving or not. No we couldn't. The worst we could be is four points above the relegation zone and the lowest we can drop is to 14th. My bad. Didn't realise that West Brom and Cardiff play each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) who cares about MON. their is a separate thread for that cowardly cretin. this is the Lambert thread i believe And comparing Lambert's and MON's football is relevant to this thread is it not? no because they cant be compared due to the budgets and squads they inherited. different scenarios completely. MON budget for both summer of 08 and 09 is more than Lambert has in his 2 seasons That wasn't the point though. The basic statement that our football under MON rings true. Obviously, that could be down to the increased budget back then but it doesn't change the validity of the original statement. Manchester United last season played better football then a team like Everton for example. That is factual regardless of the difference in spending power of them both. well the budgets and personnel are relevant though just like people being blinkered saying Ellis wasnt bad in another thread, well the football under MON was absolute toxic at times with no plan B at home and this was with better resources. Edited December 10, 2013 by Zatman 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost_of_Pongo_Waring Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Pl must be doing a great job to have us overachiving in 11th? This time next week we could be three points off the drop-zone. I still think it is a bit early to declare whether we are overacheiving or not. No we couldn't. The worst we could be is four points above the relegation zone and the lowest we can drop is to 14th. My bad. Didn't realise that West Brom and Cardiff play each other. I was wrong as well, the lowest we can drop is 13th not 14th, as Hull and Stoke play each other. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) who cares about MON. their is a separate thread for that cowardly cretin. this is the Lambert thread i believe And comparing Lambert's and MON's football is relevant to this thread is it not? no because they cant be compared due to the budgets and squads they inherited. different scenarios completely. MON budget for both summer of 08 and 09 is more than Lambert has in his 2 seasons That wasn't the point though. The basic statement that our football under MON rings true. Obviously, that could be down to the increased budget back then but it doesn't change the validity of the original statement. Manchester United last season played better football then a team like Everton for example. That is factual regardless of the difference in spending power of them both. well the budgets and personnel are relevant though just like people being blinkered saying Ellis wasnt bad in another thread, well the football under MON was absolute toxic at times with no plan B at home and this was with better resources. Look, I'm no MON fan and was never content with our football under him but even I won't deny that what we are serving up now is a complete downgrade from it. We don't even have a coherant Plan A at the moment for our home matches let alone Plan B. MON's system also utilised the midfield (including wingers) and the midfield was central to our play under him whereas the midfield may as well not even be on the pitch at times now. Edited December 10, 2013 by Isa 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bretonvilla Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Can we expect to be outplayed, outpassed and dominated by every team we play this season , be it Man City or relegation fodder like Fulham. Its become a weekly theme on MOTD that every opposing manager states that its the best his team has played all season and that they deserved more , and its always against Villa . I can`t see the problem in taking players on loan if they`re better than the players we`ve already got. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villastine Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Can we expect to be outplayed, outpassed and dominated by every team we play this season , be it Man City or relegation fodder like Fulham. Its become a weekly theme on MOTD that every opposing manager states that its the best his team has played all season and that they deserved more , and its always against Villa . I can`t see the problem in taking players on loan if they`re better than the players we`ve already got. Have you seen the league table? We are level on points with the kings of possession and pass completion Swansea! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 who cares about MON. their is a separate thread for that cowardly cretin. this is the Lambert thread i believe And comparing Lambert's and MON's football is relevant to this thread is it not? no because they cant be compared due to the budgets and squads they inherited. different scenarios completely. MON budget for both summer of 08 and 09 is more than Lambert has in his 2 seasons That wasn't the point though. The basic statement that our football under MON rings true. Obviously, that could be down to the increased budget back then but it doesn't change the validity of the original statement. Manchester United last season played better football then a team like Everton for example. That is factual regardless of the difference in spending power of them both. well the budgets and personnel are relevant though just like people being blinkered saying Ellis wasnt bad in another thread, well the football under MON was absolute toxic at times with no plan B at home and this was with better resources. Look, I'm no MON fan and was never content with our football under him but even I won't deny that what we are serving up now is a complete downgrade from it. We don't even have a coherant Plan A at the moment for our home matches let alone Plan B. MON's system also utilised the midfield (including wingers) and the midfield was central to our play under him whereas the midfield may as well not even be on the pitch at times now. Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now, when teams came to park the bus we had no plan B, on top of that he had a huge budget to address it.The best football under MON was in his second season, when we beat the likes of Newcastle 5-1, Bolton 4 -0, Blues 5 -1 and Derby 6 -0, he never hit those heights again. Lets get some realism, the amount we paid for Sidwell and NRC equates to more cost than all of our midfield put together along with the defence. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 If £3m is what the club think will get us a creative mid to develop our style of play we might as well save the money and let some of our Next Gen kids get a crack at PL football I'd love this to happen but I've closely followed a few of our loanees and they are struggling to make an impact at lower levels - they are nowhere near ready for PL Yeah i haven't been following our loan players that closely, hasn't Grealish done pretty well? I wonder what it is that makes our players struggle to take the early step into senior football when Southampton, Arsenal and other clubs do it on a regular basis? Grealish has been at Notts County - he did really well at the start but has since been pretty average Plenty of time yet for him, but he is a long long way away from the Premiership yet scored a great goal saturday Good....I truly hope he will be highly successful here, but at the moment he is a way off being Premier league-ready Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 If £3m is what the club think will get us a creative mid to develop our style of play we might as well save the money and let some of our Next Gen kids get a crack at PL football I'd love this to happen but I've closely followed a few of our loanees and they are struggling to make an impact at lower levels - they are nowhere near ready for PL Yeah i haven't been following our loan players that closely, hasn't Grealish done pretty well? I wonder what it is that makes our players struggle to take the early step into senior football when Southampton, Arsenal and other clubs do it on a regular basis? Grealish has been at Notts County - he did really well at the start but has since been pretty average Plenty of time yet for him, but he is a long long way away from the Premiership yet scored a great goal saturday Good....I truly hope he will be highly successful here, but at the moment he is a way off being Premier league-ready No i agree he's not ready yet! Maybe a year or two away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now Home form under MON - 1.51 points per match, 1.44 goals per match Home form under Lambert.- 1.03 points per match, 1.12 goal per match. So if we did have "the same issues", looks like we handed them a bit better. It is completely inaccurate to try to claim the football/our form was no better no under MON than under Lambert. When challenged, people seem to revert to the argument that MON had more money at his disposal. Well, of course he did, and I wish Lambert did as well, doesn't everyone? That's a discussion worth having, but one based on false statistics comparing Lambert's record with MON's is certainly not worth the discussion. Of course the football and the form is worse. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now, when teams came to park the bus we had no plan B, on top of that he had a huge budget to address it.The best football under MON was in his second season, when we beat the likes of Newcastle 5-1, Bolton 4 -0, Blues 5 -1 and Derby 6 -0, he never hit those heights again. Lets get some realism, the amount we paid for Sidwell and NRC equates to more cost than all of our midfield put together along with the defence. No doubt. I wasn't trying to talk up MON or the football he served up. I think both his and Lambert's football at home are awful but Lambert's is worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted December 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 10, 2013 (edited) Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now Home form under MON - 1.51 points per match, 1.44 goals per match Home form under Lambert.- 1.03 points per match, 1.12 goal per match. So if we did have "the same issues", looks like we handed them a bit better. It is completely inaccurate to try to claim the football/our form was no better no under MON than under Lambert. When challenged, people seem to revert to the argument that MON had more money at his disposal. Well, of course he did, and I wish Lambert did as well, doesn't everyone? That's a discussion worth having, but one based on false statistics comparing Lambert's record with MON's is certainly not worth the discussion. Of course the football and the form is worse. EDIT: Just read your post properly But the problems people refer to is the brand of football. We do suffer the same problems, it's pure counter attack with no plan b. The fact that MON had more money has to come into it because he had more "game changing" players at his disposal which comes from having more money to spend. Looking at Villa under Lambert and Villa under MON it's very similar. Same problems from a football style point of view. It's unfair to bring up the point total difference without bringing up the amount of money both have had to spend. Edited December 10, 2013 by PieFacE 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaCas Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 A question : By what % do you think we have reduced the wage under Lambert? Looking at the squad we had with McL, and the players still on the books, I don't beleive it is as big a reduction as we might initially think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 A question : By what % do you think we have reduced the wage under Lambert? Looking at the squad we had with McL, and the players still on the books, I don't beleive it is as big a reduction as we might initially think I'm sure Faulkner said we're now running in line with FFP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 A question : By what % do you think we have reduced the wage under Lambert? Looking at the squad we had with McL, and the players still on the books, I don't beleive it is as big a reduction as we might initially think I'm sure Faulkner said we're now running in line with FFP. FFP is as big a joke as the organisation that invented it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Sidwell shown he was a step above our current midfield the other day. I actually think Beye would be more solid at right back defensively than what we have. Sidwell is rubbish, as is Beye We were shit on Sunday, but that doesnt make Sidwell or Beye any good Sidwell rubbish? Doesn't say much for our midfielders on Sunday then, and actually he has been playing well for Fulhan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AntrimBlack Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 3m for an AM? All that will get is another mediocre midfielder like the ones we already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 A question : By what % do you think we have reduced the wage under Lambert? Looking at the squad we had with McL, and the players still on the books, I don't beleive it is as big a reduction as we might initially thinkI'm sure Faulkner said we're now running in line with FFP. FFP is as big a joke as the organisation that invented it. Agreed but just using it to point out our new wage bill probably has dropped a fair amount recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now Home form under MON - 1.51 points per match, 1.44 goals per match Home form under Lambert.- 1.03 points per match, 1.12 goal per match. So if we did have "the same issues", looks like we handed them a bit better. It is completely inaccurate to try to claim the football/our form was no better no under MON than under Lambert. When challenged, people seem to revert to the argument that MON had more money at his disposal. Well, of course he did, and I wish Lambert did as well, doesn't everyone? That's a discussion worth having, but one based on false statistics comparing Lambert's record with MON's is certainly not worth the discussion. Of course the football and the form is worse. EDIT: Just read your post properly But the problems people refer to is the brand of football. We do suffer the same problems, it's pure counter attack with no plan b. The fact that MON had more money has to come into it because he had more "game changing" players at his disposal which comes from having more money to spend. Looking at Villa under Lambert and Villa under MON it's very similar. Same problems from a football style point of view. It's unfair to bring up the point total difference without bringing up the amount of money both have had to spend. Even though your post takes the form of disagreeing with mine, it actually agrees completely with what I said. Which is an achievement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted December 10, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted December 10, 2013 Our home form wasn't that great under MON, we had the same issues we had then which we do now Home form under MON - 1.51 points per match, 1.44 goals per match Home form under Lambert.- 1.03 points per match, 1.12 goal per match. So if we did have "the same issues", looks like we handed them a bit better. It is completely inaccurate to try to claim the football/our form was no better no under MON than under Lambert. When challenged, people seem to revert to the argument that MON had more money at his disposal. Well, of course he did, and I wish Lambert did as well, doesn't everyone? That's a discussion worth having, but one based on false statistics comparing Lambert's record with MON's is certainly not worth the discussion. Of course the football and the form is worse. EDIT: Just read your post properly But the problems people refer to is the brand of football. We do suffer the same problems, it's pure counter attack with no plan b. The fact that MON had more money has to come into it because he had more "game changing" players at his disposal which comes from having more money to spend. Looking at Villa under Lambert and Villa under MON it's very similar. Same problems from a football style point of view. It's unfair to bring up the point total difference without bringing up the amount of money both have had to spend. Even though your post takes the form of disagreeing with mine, it actually agrees completely with what I said. Which is an achievement. I amaze myself sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts