Good article. Highlights the points I was trying to illustrate to one of your fellow Villains t'other day.
I think Garde would do well but not at Villa. It's just the wrong time to take us over i think. He will want to play a certain way which might well be attractive on the eye but i just think we need someone in there who will be the type to grind out a result. I dont think Villa fans are that bothered anymore about pretty football, it would be nice to see a few wins and get the home form better. Garde could come in and do a great job but in my opinion options like Pearson, Moyes would be more suitable. The fact nothing has happened in a week makes me think the board have already made up their mind they want Garde. I am happy with Kevin Mac for a few games ..
Question is, have we the players to grind out results? Sherwood didn't think so last season, which is why he went on the attack at all costs. We're even less likely to have the grind-out-results players now. Couple of things in the article struck me:
"He remains a risk but no more so than sticking with something so clearly broken. With the Premier League’s repairmen, Tony Pulis and Sam Allardyce, otherwise engaged, there aren’t a great deal of safe-bet managers available to Villa."
and:
"Villa have only lost one match by more than a single goal this season – when Alan Hutton scored a freak own goal in a 2-0 defeat at Stamford Bridge earlier this month. Garde would face an uphill task, but not an impossible one."
These strike me as bang on the nail. Garde is no more a risk than the other available options, and there's a lot going for him. Him, Moyes or Rodgers would be my top 3 (assuming Villa don't want Laudrup, my personal choice). Pearson worries me; he's not a Pulis or an Alladyce, and his success at Leicester was based on players bought in. He's no great record of improving players, which is what we need.
He is a greater risk than Moyes or Rodgers because he has no experience at managing in the premier league.
Yep, but he has followed the PL closely since his Arsenal days and his media work is based almost wholly on PL matches. Granted Moyes and Rodgers have more direct experience and at first sight are less risky. But Garde probably has a very good understanding of the French contingent he's inheriting. So the risks are probably more balanced than one might think at first glance.
What we don't know (but Villa may) is whether Moyes or Rodgers are interested.
The fact Kevin Mac has pretty much told us today that Garde will be the next manager finalises it with me to be honest. The good thing with Villa at the moment and there is not much good is that we can only improve on results and position in the table. We cant go any lower and hopefully the players will take to Garde and his methods.
Bluenose in peace here. Much as I found Villa struggle over the last 2 or 3 years (much in the same way we have, up until Rowett took over), it would be a great pity if Villa did end up in the Championship, as it would look pretty bad for the city as a whole in terms of Premiership status.
I do quite like Garde: he certainly ticks a lot of boxes other than having direct PL experience. But he's managed clubs to a level of success; and as others have pointed out, he does have knowledge and awareness of the PL, albeit indirectly.
The press seem to favour him, and even Wenger endorses his credentials!
Assuming the board can get him (and some of his backroom staff) on board, what kind of expectations would the Villa fans have? What if the next 10 or 15 games under him resulted on draws, losses and the odd win? What if you were still in the relegation zone by say January/February? Would you or the board be calling for his head and a new manager? Or would you perhaps acknowledge that Villa and the manager needs time (a season or two) to turn the club around to the way Garde wants it?
Garde is the right choice in my book, but I worry that if he doesn't keep you up, he'll be out on his ear with a £2m compo cheque in his back pocket, all because the board lost patience.
How can this merry-go-round of managers at Villa bring confidence to anyone?
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 12 hours, 10 minutes ago
Yep, but he has followed the PL closely since his Arsenal days and his media work is based almost wholly on PL matches. Granted Moyes and Rodgers have more direct experience and at first sight are less risky. But Garde probably has a very good understanding of the French contingent he's inheriting. So the risks are probably more balanced than one might think at first glance.
What we don't know (but Villa may) is whether Moyes or Rodgers are interested.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've convinced me. Let's agree on Garde.
See Collymore has been spouting again, along the line Villa must get Moyes and give him anything he asks for, and Garde would be a huge risk:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/stan-collymore-aston-villa-must-10367274
Some things Stan doesn't seem to realise. The players we have are not Moyes type players, it would be January before he'd have any chance of modifying the squad, and Lerner is very unlikely to produce the cash which would make a significant difference to the squad. Also, he underrated what Garde did at Lyon; he not only had the firing again on vastly deleted resources, but when in charge of their acadamy was responsible for developing a number of outstanding players including Benzema and Martial.
If Moyes came in I think he's a good enough manager to avoid relegation. Probably. But then reading what's been said about Garde he probably is too.
Im sure Garde will get it, however all this talk of developing the youth players might be all well and good, but weren't we saying the same about Sherwood when he arrived. This one was of the reason he was given the job to develop the youth. The fact is Grealish was given his chance but the others obviously were not good enough. We are where we are in the league for a reason, yes Sherwood is to blame partly but its mainly down to how awfully the club is being run at the moment !! Garde will be no instant saviour, the problems lie deeper than the manager.
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
Guardian article on Garde and Villa
Page 1 of 1
posted on 29/10/15
Good article. Highlights the points I was trying to illustrate to one of your fellow Villains t'other day.
posted on 29/10/15
I think Garde would do well but not at Villa. It's just the wrong time to take us over i think. He will want to play a certain way which might well be attractive on the eye but i just think we need someone in there who will be the type to grind out a result. I dont think Villa fans are that bothered anymore about pretty football, it would be nice to see a few wins and get the home form better. Garde could come in and do a great job but in my opinion options like Pearson, Moyes would be more suitable. The fact nothing has happened in a week makes me think the board have already made up their mind they want Garde. I am happy with Kevin Mac for a few games ..
posted on 30/10/15
Question is, have we the players to grind out results? Sherwood didn't think so last season, which is why he went on the attack at all costs. We're even less likely to have the grind-out-results players now. Couple of things in the article struck me:
"He remains a risk but no more so than sticking with something so clearly broken. With the Premier League’s repairmen, Tony Pulis and Sam Allardyce, otherwise engaged, there aren’t a great deal of safe-bet managers available to Villa."
and:
"Villa have only lost one match by more than a single goal this season – when Alan Hutton scored a freak own goal in a 2-0 defeat at Stamford Bridge earlier this month. Garde would face an uphill task, but not an impossible one."
These strike me as bang on the nail. Garde is no more a risk than the other available options, and there's a lot going for him. Him, Moyes or Rodgers would be my top 3 (assuming Villa don't want Laudrup, my personal choice). Pearson worries me; he's not a Pulis or an Alladyce, and his success at Leicester was based on players bought in. He's no great record of improving players, which is what we need.
posted on 30/10/15
He is a greater risk than Moyes or Rodgers because he has no experience at managing in the premier league.
posted on 30/10/15
Yep, but he has followed the PL closely since his Arsenal days and his media work is based almost wholly on PL matches. Granted Moyes and Rodgers have more direct experience and at first sight are less risky. But Garde probably has a very good understanding of the French contingent he's inheriting. So the risks are probably more balanced than one might think at first glance.
What we don't know (but Villa may) is whether Moyes or Rodgers are interested.
posted on 30/10/15
The fact Kevin Mac has pretty much told us today that Garde will be the next manager finalises it with me to be honest. The good thing with Villa at the moment and there is not much good is that we can only improve on results and position in the table. We cant go any lower and hopefully the players will take to Garde and his methods.
posted on 31/10/15
Bluenose in peace here. Much as I found Villa struggle over the last 2 or 3 years (much in the same way we have, up until Rowett took over), it would be a great pity if Villa did end up in the Championship, as it would look pretty bad for the city as a whole in terms of Premiership status.
I do quite like Garde: he certainly ticks a lot of boxes other than having direct PL experience. But he's managed clubs to a level of success; and as others have pointed out, he does have knowledge and awareness of the PL, albeit indirectly.
The press seem to favour him, and even Wenger endorses his credentials!
Assuming the board can get him (and some of his backroom staff) on board, what kind of expectations would the Villa fans have? What if the next 10 or 15 games under him resulted on draws, losses and the odd win? What if you were still in the relegation zone by say January/February? Would you or the board be calling for his head and a new manager? Or would you perhaps acknowledge that Villa and the manager needs time (a season or two) to turn the club around to the way Garde wants it?
Garde is the right choice in my book, but I worry that if he doesn't keep you up, he'll be out on his ear with a £2m compo cheque in his back pocket, all because the board lost patience.
How can this merry-go-round of managers at Villa bring confidence to anyone?
posted on 31/10/15
comment by McParlandTheGreat (U6150)
posted 12 hours, 10 minutes ago
Yep, but he has followed the PL closely since his Arsenal days and his media work is based almost wholly on PL matches. Granted Moyes and Rodgers have more direct experience and at first sight are less risky. But Garde probably has a very good understanding of the French contingent he's inheriting. So the risks are probably more balanced than one might think at first glance.
What we don't know (but Villa may) is whether Moyes or Rodgers are interested.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You've convinced me. Let's agree on Garde.
posted on 1/11/15
See Collymore has been spouting again, along the line Villa must get Moyes and give him anything he asks for, and Garde would be a huge risk:
http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/stan-collymore-aston-villa-must-10367274
Some things Stan doesn't seem to realise. The players we have are not Moyes type players, it would be January before he'd have any chance of modifying the squad, and Lerner is very unlikely to produce the cash which would make a significant difference to the squad. Also, he underrated what Garde did at Lyon; he not only had the firing again on vastly deleted resources, but when in charge of their acadamy was responsible for developing a number of outstanding players including Benzema and Martial.
If Moyes came in I think he's a good enough manager to avoid relegation. Probably. But then reading what's been said about Garde he probably is too.
posted on 1/11/15
Im sure Garde will get it, however all this talk of developing the youth players might be all well and good, but weren't we saying the same about Sherwood when he arrived. This one was of the reason he was given the job to develop the youth. The fact is Grealish was given his chance but the others obviously were not good enough. We are where we are in the league for a reason, yes Sherwood is to blame partly but its mainly down to how awfully the club is being run at the moment !! Garde will be no instant saviour, the problems lie deeper than the manager.
Page 1 of 1