Kid Icarus

This is where I definitely agree like. Tbh not even so much January gone, but past Januarys.

We're definitely at a transition point like after an awful season like. Well let's see how Villa's 26/27 is, which is their version of our 25/26 - it's really an aside point to their achievements and getting into hypothetical stats etc, but there's a lot of 'this is unsustainable' stuff going on with how Villa play. The key difference I see with Villa compared to us is their transfer strategy - they're much more high turnover and act decisively in the transfer market if they're having a middling to poor season. Our past few January's have been anything but that.

Fair enough if that's your opinion like. I think you can point to quite a few 'whisker away' moments for us as well - a match away from another League Cup, missing out on the Conference League - for example. I'd say their achievements are nigh on identical in their circumstances, but each to their own

They missed out to Eddie Howe's Newcastle United, which I think says a lot about who is and isn't getting credit in that scenario. Emery's done a cracking job. Like I say, it's the disparity between the perception of what Emery's done at Villa vs what Howe's done here that I think is so jarring.

At present they've finished in a European place the same amount of times as us and are due to finish this season +1 on that front. That's not them being consistent and us yo-yoing, there's very little difference unless you want to count the year 7th didn't get us into Europe because of Man United winning the FA Cup as a failure on our part, but the year they got 7th and got into the Conference as a success on theirs', which obviously makes no sense. Howe also came in in November the previous year and got us from 20th to 11th, Emery came in and got them from 16th to 7th. The exact same amount of positions jumped and 43 points vs 46 points gained - again very similar. Their positions have been 7th, 4th, 6th, probably 4th or 5th and maybe a cup - starting from a higher position and with a squad that already had the likes of Martinez, Watkins, Konsa, Mings, Kamara, McGinn, Cash in it and with the Grealish money in its back pocket. Comparatively, our positions have been 11th, 4th, 7th, 5th and a cup - starting from a lower position and with a squad that's only survivors are Schär, Murphy, and Joelinton - all of which are now on their way out. Our season ahead of theirs' has obviously been really bad, so it'll be interesting to see what their version (26/27) will be like. None of this is to downplay Emery's achievements either btw, but the extent to which Emery is hailed as this that and the other while Howe's achievements are downplayed or sidelined - all while their achievements are actually really, really similar - is what I find mad. Easy to forget that this time a year ago and in fact at the start of this very successful season that there was a Emery Out section of Villa's support who were picking out his flaws in player selection, the tactics, the subs etc. Things can change really quickly in football like, look at the esteem Howe was held in a year ago. Emery could very well be in Howe's position in a year's time and vice-versa.

Yeah but have you heard The Frog Chorus by Paul McCartney? Safety for Bobbydazzla

Classic case of a player that's not playing in an underperforming team being viewed more favourably than they were when they were actually in the team I think. Easy to forget that it wasn't working with him in the team as a CF due to his complete aversion to getting into the box or making standard CF runs when the ball was out wide. It's not working now and we should be giving him more game time, but it also doesn't mean that when he was playing everything was fine or even better. I really like him as a player, but I think both the comments that he doesn't play like a 9 and is currently a square peg in a round hole for the way we play are pretty on the money. If he'll come good or get the chance to come good I don't know, but here's hoping. From here for a reminder of what the general consensus was around November.

Villa's 7th place finish that got them conference league is the same 7th place finish that got us no Europe at all. Emery came in the season after Howe came in and their seasons have been very similar until now, this year for Villa is basically our 24/25.

Is it still a heavy schedule if every match is a breeze? If you went out of both domestic cups straight away? They could go to the final and they'll still have played less games than us, despite us being out of every cup competition over a month ago. The demands of the Champions League and Europa league are very different, Villa struggled massively in the league the last time they were in the Champions League, needing to bring in a handful of loans in January in order to go on a run at the end of the season.

Pope's amount of mistakes this season has been crazy like. The fact that plenty of people think he's still a much better overall 'keeper than Ramsdale probably says it all about our situation like.

Funny thing about those stats that stands out for me is the amount of shots that we face. Combine that with our xGA being good (5th best last time I checked) and the first thing that comes to mind is that the opposition are being told to try their luck more because our 'keeper's shite.

Mornin' everyone

The buck stopping with the manager and him being ultimately responsible if results are poor is usually the orthodoxy that clubs live by, often discounting context. Why we as fans automatically accept that same outlook clubs have as received wisdom that's self-evident for our own positions, without questioning its validity (especially in circumstances where the context sticks out like a sore thumb) I'm not sure.

Villa are running exactly a season behind our post-takeover schedule, it's uncanny.

Hahaha, get it up ye

If West Ham win tomorrow, wewzaz.

Not a point I'd have made tbh, but tbf Howe is more the common denominator, our players largely aren't the same players that played last season, either because they've left, been injured, or not featured to the same extent. Tonali and Gordon are really the only two players that have comparable appearances this season vs last season.

Considering no players were mentioned it would say everything about him and his culpability that he took it personally. Likewise how are we all supposed to take the reports that Gordon is looking to move away and that he's outgrown Newcastle?

Yes, Eddie Howe is Paul McCartney

The bit in bold is where we're at an impasse then, because I couldn't possibly disagree with you more on that point. The idea that those things have nothing to do with our on field performance runs counter to all of the evidence you see in football. You can probably count on one hand the amount of clubs that have been successful on the pitch who were in a mess off it, and probably on one finger the ones where the mess has included player recruitment.

You can call it complete nonsense all you want, but that's not an argument. I'm not posting about what happened in the summer day after day randomly, it's because day after day the criticisms that are thrown at Howe are for things that are objectively not his fault, blaming him for taking too long to make a decision on Isak being the latest case in point.

For someone who prides themselves on judging things on the cold, hard facts, you sure do love a random and incredibly tenuous analogy like.

I would just follow the same logic you have with stats only telling part of the story and there being context behind them. Our results and performances have a bigger story behind them than it being the fault of a manager who up until this season was successful and overachieved for 3.5 seasons. That on its own should give pause for thought, but if that's not enough on its own, you only need to look at all of the other variables from previous seasons compared to this one and take them into account: no CEO for a year, no DoF or CEO in the summer, losing our attacking focal point AND his back up, large squad overhaul, being expected to work as manager and a quasi DoF with all of the repercussions that has, the poor signings as a result of the mismanagement of the summer by PIF, a huge match schedule, injuries to key players throughout the season, players with eyes out the door or on the world cup. Those are just the ones off the top of my head. If Howe's record here had been something like scraped survival, 8th, 10th, 9th and a couple of quarter finals those things would still be valid but there'd be nothing worth holding onto, but beneath all of that dirt we already know there's gold, it's been proven to us. That's why we shouldn't be discounting it, what's underneath all of that is worth holding onto.

Because it's the only question that's being put forward is whether we should keep Howe, and that's at best. In other cases it's an assertion that we should. In both cases the amount of times he's blamed for things that are objectively not his fault (nigh on always from the summer) is ridiculous. Someone's just claimed that no one is doing that, then 2 posts later someone was blaming him for us not selling Isak soon enough. It's day after day at this point.

Stats might only tell part of the story, but the stuff you see with your eyes also only tell part of the story and are highly subjective. Yet the only conclusion that's reached is: can only be the manager's fault/we have to blame the manager.