Chez

villa are decent. it feels like just a matter of time before they score. We are as toothless as we were the last time rusk was at the helm...scrub that, we are just as toothless as ever.

looking back to summer 2023, we were able to offload Salisu, Djenepo, Diallo and Orsic, but relied on loans to shift Bella-Kotchap, Caleta-Car, Onuachu, Perraud, Lyanco. It's noticeable that they all are non-English, which might have helped? Not many in that list that really did much at Prem level. The current crop have more than replicated that feat. It's hard to say who will leave this summer. Whoever the new manager is, they may have to work with largely what is here, with obvious exceptions.

These days, the manager is usually just one of several people that form a recruitment team, so it's hard to know if any manager has done well/badly with the transfer budget available. If he comes here, how much say will he have on players coming in? It's obvious the recent managers have got their way on some players, but not all. I am guessing there is probably still a `recruitment group' that present options to the manager perhaps based on his requirements or perhaps just based on the fact the scouts rate them. I',m guessing the manager has final say, but even then you still have to get the player and you might have to accept option b or c. If you get option d and he doesn't pan out, is the manager to blame?

all three teams have very different styles. You'd of thought one would have worked. I guess despite crushing most championship teams, all three teams showed obvious frailties last season. Ipswich struggled to keep the ball and dominate opponents, Leicester relied heavily on the fast counter and we relied totally on dominating possession.

Him not bringing his number 2 etc. is a concern as he/they might be the actual talent/brains.

Very few mentions of Dyche on here. Which surprises me a little. He's another manager that has got a team promoted and he got Burnley into Europe, which was quite a feat. Every time I watched us play Burnley we seemed to murder them, but they always dug in and often won, somehow. They had a great work ethic, which enabled them to wrestle some control back and they punished us. I never liked what I saw in terms of his team's style, but always felt he got the best out of a very limited set of players. Maybe we are not looking for that, as we will have `better' players than most, but normally there are a few on here that hanker for an `old school' boss.

football insider, yeah i know, suggests Ramsdale has a £25m buy out clause.

I often wonder if these famed big time coaches could do it with a load of shit at their disposal. The situation a manager comes into makes a huge difference.

I'm struggling to get the Hull destruction at SMS out of my mind and thus hanker for Rosenior, but I guess that isn't going to happen and someone made a good point about him on another thread that he had a bloody good squad and failed to make the play offs. Not sure I understand the desire to get Rohl, but the Wednesday fan I know said "keep your mitts off" and likes him a lot. I'd take Gary O'Neal. There i've said it. I can't stand the thought of employing a narky little skate, but I thought he was a little unlucky at both Bournemouth and Wolves. to be honest I don't really know who would be a good fit, but what I do know is we will need a very strong personality that is able to change the mindset of the players on a short space of time.

aha, but will any of the seven teams play as badly as Fulham did when he was at the helm last time. we were terrible. to be fair, at that point we were on our knees after the the Spurs nightmare. perhaps we are in a better place, marginally.

the bbc website has a poll about wether martin should have been sacked - 62% suggest the club was wrong to sack Martin even though we would be relegated anyway, 27% say yes we were right to sack martin but wrong man appointed to replace him.

if the Fulham game is anything to go by, expect 11 behind the ball with the aim of not conceding.

I'm a big fan, but he came on and was far too casual, gave the ball away a couple of times cheaply and looked laboured - when we need him to get hold of the ball and help see out the game. I am not buying that he is exhausted. He's just not playing his best right now. besides, he had just come on. No reason not to be as bright as a button. I can see why some might be frustrated/annoyed at that cameo last night and when combined with lots of media stuff linking him elsewhere (not to mention the shiteness of the side this season) you will get some moans. But I don't think for one minute that he has downed his tools or thrown his toys out of the pram. Whenever players or teams play badly the 'can't be arsed' gets thrown at them. It's rare that players can't be arsed. Usually they are just bad/playing badly. Heads do go down, especially when you are a few goals behind.

I assume this is a load of bollocks, but would welcome a reboot at right back. He has been really underwhelming.

I would say that come the end of the season that's shallot as far as Juric is concerned.

Other than leicester, is there a team in our run in that is remotely struggling for results or goals? They all look daunting to me. We could park the bus and hope for the best, but the opponents would still have to perform poorly, like Fulham did, for us to keep a clean sheet. There is always hope that we score first and hold out for a long period in a game I suppose.

...but not all. It's about time you added "I'll be your saint" by Adorable to your half time play list sir. back to Dibling. £100m sounds about right to me. We are talking about one of the best young players here that has proved he can do it in the Prem. Whatever the real figure we'd settle for, at least putting that massive price out there might stop us having to read that Spurs are making a £20m bid.

Blimey. He's not done a great deal in recent weeks, but I think everyone has seen enough to know we have a real talent on our hands and that kind of money isn't anywhere near enough. Talk to me about who you would be spending that whole £20m on?

Normally, when I read posts saying "play the kids, they couldn't do any worse" I roll my eyes and think shall I respond with a "of course they can"...but never do. This time I will. They can do worse. So let's not do that. However, if we genuinely know that Sugawara, Taylor, Manning and or Wellington will be here next season, then playing them ahead of KWP (assuming all hope of him signing a new contract have been extinguished - I'm not sure how high his stock is right now) for the last five games does makes sense. If Onuachu is to be retained along with Archer (with Armstrong and Brereton-Diaz departing), lets see them. However, I am not sure it's all that clear who is going to be here both in terms of manager and players, so don't see how its going to work.

not sure where you get this `month' honeymoon period from. imo, we had 45 minutes against west ham, when we played with intensity, got the ball wide and crossed early/first time to create problems for west ham.... and then since then it's been same old shit. five at the back cluelessness, far too many individual mistakes, two many huge gaps down the middle, an overpowered midfield, slow build up play, a disjointed side and complete lack of attacking threat.

oh super. maybe we should just play him left back, where he looks most comfortable. just an idea.

has he played there before, i cant remember? why not stick with four at the back? why did he change it last week? not sure why i'm asking. the whole season makes no sense to me.

you are kidding? Juric has changed the formation once since he came and that was in the last game. nd thats both in terms of line ups and during the game. He hasn't tried different formations at all and has been wedded to his system. He and Martin have been as bad as each other in that department. I think you are right that the build up is less laborious, but not by much. We still pass it around the back four a lot, going from left to right and back again. The Brighton game saw us do that all game. We went nowhere. We couldn't get out of our own half. We still pass it short and have been caught in possession. There is less suicidal stuff. That has been replaced by hoofing it away and lost possession. I agree, we couldn't get any worse under RM. But we haven't exactly got better either. For me, the only difference really is Sulemana now provides an out ball and an attacking threat where before we had...I don't know really, what did we have before?

I presume you mean 0 shots on target against Wolves? You could argue `shots on target' is an outcome rather than a style, but it's interesting to compare. We certainly don't have the ball as much now. Are we creating more chances? Are we taking more shots? Are we more attacking? Are we more `dangerous'? Newcastle 78%, 19 shots, 4 on target Forrest 65%, 5, 1 Brentford 63%, 18, 6 Man U 44%, 6, 4 Ipswich 53%, 11, 3 Bournemouth 60%, 9, 3 Arsenal 41%, 8, 2 Leicester 42%, 14, 7 Man City 43%, 5, 2 Everton 65%, 9, 2 Wolves 71%, 9, 0 Liverpool 38%, 7, 5 Brighton 48%, 10, 2 Chelsea 45%, 6, 4 Villa, 53% 4, 0 Spurs 42%, 9 , 3 average 9.25 shots a game Fulham 43%, 5, 1 West Ham 54%, 18, 5 Palace 54%, 7, 3 Brentford 51%, 8, 1 Man U 40%, 13, 5 Forrest 56%, 10, 4 Newcastle 53%, 12, 5 Ipswich 43%, 9, 4 Bournemouth 45%, 11, 4 Brighton 50%, 6, 1 Chelsea %40, 7, 2 Liverpool 29%, 6, 4 average 9.7 shots a game

Yes, i am saying that, to my eyes, there isn't much difference. Maybe you could take the time to describe what I have failed to see.