VincentGuerin
-
Posts
4,462 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
12
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by VincentGuerin
-
-
58 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:
Except it’s an entirely hyperbolic post which doesn’t really reflect reality.
The club rid itself of the debt that had been hanging over us for years, attracted plenty new investment and built a training ground in that period.
We reached a point where performances on the pitch plateaued as we lost players and the lack of recruitment infrastructure and short term thinking on the pitch came to bite. We’ve tried to address that in the last few years (yes, at times hilariously badly) but broadly that infrastructure is moving in the right direction. I think we’ve tried to do too much too quickly and made a complete arse of a lot of it in the process.
I mean, I’m sure there was a club in recent times that changed the structure of their football department, introduced a new model, signed about 40 players every window, hired all sorts of managers including their director of football and got relegated in the process. I’m told that club is now miles ahead of everybody at everything.
This isn’t a prediction that everything works out great for us, but the work done to sort out the balance sheet and infrastructure of the club whilst performing well has allowed a platform for progression. Whether we take it or not is up for debate for now, your characterisation of us though is based in reality but laced with hyperbole and your hopes for how this plays out.
I don't think hyperbole is really fair.
Aberdeen have been bottom six two years in three. The general trend for them is poor. They've repeatedly made bad decisions, and off the pitch they have an enormous problem that their rivals don't have. Every other "big" Scottish club has hit historically poor performance when addressing stadium issues, and Aberdeen have that still to come. Maybe they buck the trend in that regard, but nothing about how the club is run suggests that'll be the case.
Aberdeen finished ahead of us and we had to take that on the chin for a bit, which wasn't enjoyable. But I think in the long-term, we'll be seen to have had a better last decade.
Of course I hope Aberdeen have a bad decade. It would be very funny. But it's far from purely wishful thinking, as any sober observer can see.
0 -
9 minutes ago, Bogbrush1903 said:
The post on isolation is reasonable to an extent; however, this is about your 500th post on how Hearts are so much better than Aberdeen.
Did an Aberdeen girl break your heart or something?
You need to let it go and move on.
I've not posted about Aberdeen for ages.
You can engage with the post of ignore the post. What grinds the forum to a halt is poor responses along the lines of what we've seen above.
I stand by the post, by the way. I think it's an entirely fair picture of Aberdeen's situation. I think you'll struggle to keep up with Hearts and Hibs over the next decade due to your failure to make hay while the sun shone. And I was reponding to people on here referencing your good run over us and putting it in context.
You did have it over us for quite a while. But what do you have to show for it? Aberdeen were asleep at the wheel while Hearts and Hibs were getting stuff done.
0 -
Just now, kingjoey said:
You are beginning to sound like a St Mirren fan. Again, that’s your prerogative.
Take the night off, mate. You’re having a swing at a perfectly reasonable post.
Take it easy.
0 -
2 minutes ago, kingjoey said:
Ok. In the last 12 seasons Aberdeen have finished higher than Hearts 10 times.
In the last 10 seasons Aberdeen have finished 2nd four times, with Hearts on zero.
In the last 121 years Aberdeen have never been relegated, Hearts have been countless times.
In the last 121 years Aberdeen have beaten Rangers countless times at Hampden, Hearts have never done that.
If you want to concentrate on the last three years, that's your perogative.
That's great if you are in a bad mood and want to make the chat silly.
We're takking about Aberdeen's current direction. They're not hiring this guy a decade ago.
Things have changed around Aberdeen and they are starting to see the consequences of not making the most of their opportunity ten years ago.
0 -
Just now, kingjoey said:
I think that's called "obsession".
It's an on-topic post. Unlike yours, old mucker.
Care to join the discussion?
0 -
On 21/04/2024 at 18:30, MikeAFC94 said:
The no-man's land being 'above Hearts last season'?
On 22/04/2024 at 08:48, Suspect Device said:And most of the 10 years before that.
That's great for you to cling on to, but we're not in administration now, we're not recovering from that any more, and we're no longer throwing loads of money and resources at building a new stand. You did have the better of us for a few years, but we've come out of that with a completed modern stadium and a club that's on a sure footing with a proper infrastructure, and we're about to play group stage football for the second time in three years.
Aberdeen have nothing to show for that period, even in the medium term. It's been wasted. You built nothing and now you're in danger of being left behind. In terms of status, you're looking like you've regressed to the world before Hearts, Hibs, and Rangers imploded.
Aberdeen have now been third in the league once in the last six seasons (already looking more luck than judgement). They've been in the bottom half of the league two years out of three. They've repeatedly shown poor leadership, poor judgement, and a total lack of strategy. Since Hearts were promoted we've (so far) out-performed Aberdeen by 43 points in less than three seasons. It's hard to argue that it looks like there's been a large momentum swing from you to us.
Aberdeen might bounce back next year. This guy might do a good job. You can never really tell. But it's unarguable at the moment that Aberdeen's purple patch is beginning to look very much like a window of opportunity that has now closed, and been absolutely squandered, to no real long-term impact.
1 -
36 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:
f**k me. weegie media this, Weegie media that. I managed about 7 posts on this thread, cos 1 guy said "hipster" people lost their head.
Did it get any better?
Aberdeen fans really need to get ovet this bizarre obsession they have about the impact of geography on media reporting.
0 -
I see that on Booking.com the Killie hotel has a risible rating of 8.8.
With our hotel's 9.6 rating (EXCEPTIONAL), we really should be swatting this mob aside.
Hearts win or Naismith out.
2 -
Just now, kingjoey said:
Good idea on your part, pretend three years ago didn’t happen.
Oh, I'm sure it happened. But, it was three years ago. So...?
0 -
9 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:
according to the athletic…San Siro is unique in the sense that it actually has three dressing rooms. One for Inter, one for Milan and the other for an away team. The Inter dressing room has a lot more space, whereas Milan’s dressing room is more compact.
If I was the Inter kit man, I'd lock the Milan dressing room then just take the keys up the road with me.
Next Milan home game - CHAOS.
Fucking beautiful. What a plan.
2 -
4 minutes ago, kingjoey said:
I’m sure you lot were posting in the Billy Big Baws league threads when you were in the Seaside leagues three years ago.
Sorry, mate. Maybe next season.
MAYBE.
0 -
6 minutes ago, kingjoey said:
So no two people can ever be exactly in line with each other, nor be exactly the same height. You learn something new every day.
NEVER.
0 -
7 hours ago, 10menwent2mow said:
If they can't be in line then why do we get dead heats in other sporting events??
Because of the degree to which it can be measured.
Same as how two people might be 5'10, and we call them the same height. But if we were to be able to measure further, we'd find one is a tiny bit taller than the other.
0 -
Aye. Barring a monumental collapse (and a stunning finish from Killie) this season will go down as "pretty good", I'd say.
3rd place, two trips to Hampden and only beaten by the sticky buns there, won an unseeded tie in Europe. Nothing really to complain about, which is simultaneously very nice and quite annoying. Had we avoided the OF at Hampden, we'd probably have had a cup final, which would have elevated things a bit.
Interesting summer ahead. A lot going out the door, I reckon. I'd expect a rather different looking team next season and it'll be interesting to see what kind of market we go for and how much we spend.
0 -
2 hours ago, kingjoey said:
I'm wondering if "Chris" is Vincent.
He's far too positive to be me.
2 -
I've got some reservations about this one.
Hearts will come into this game with a bit of baggage and in need of a lift after the semi-final defeat and they'll know that a victory will see Kilmarnock check out of the race for third. But I can see us being good guests here and not taking anything home with us.
That said, the tough game Killie gave us a few weeks ago should serve as a wake-up call, and Hearts might just floor us all by picking up a point.
I hope nobody gets booked.
7 -
19 minutes ago, Tony Wonder said:
Felt sorry for Tait in tears at the end. It was his mistake for the 2nd but he was trying to be positive, you can't be annoyed at youngsters for trying to do the right thing. One of his team mates should've blootered Cantwell and taken the yellow anyway to cover him.
Agree with this. As he pushed forward my mate next to me shouted "That's the game, son", and I murmured my agreement, just as he lost the ball.
We'd been crying out for someone to do that, and he's just unlucky the way it unfolded. Someone should have taken the booking. Two really poor goals.
1 -
1 minute ago, stu2910 said:
I'm not disputing that someone living in Stockport will be interested in Stockport, that's not the point. In the last few posts you've said that people in Scotland will be interested in Stockport v Tranmere but then go on to question why someone in England would watch Partick v Ayr. Other than, oh I don't know, massively increased media attention, what does the English game have that's so interesting?
You could ask the same question about why your average Austrian fan is more interested in German football than your average German fan is in Austrian football.
It's higher profile (circular, I know, but that's just how it is), it has better media coverage as it has a bigger population and therefore a bigger market, and it's a football set-up that contains some of the best teams in the world. That all filters down.
All these things added together make something more appealing. Why do more Scottish people take an interest in La Liga than the Portuguese league?
0 -
Just now, stu2910 said:
This is kind of the point I was trying to make before. England doesn't care about Scottish football but they're never going to care if they're not able to see it, unless our league suddenly becomes like Saudi Arabia which I can't see happening somehow.
The quality might not be amazing at the moment, but one of the most consistently interesting aspects of Scottish football is the Championship. A division that until recently was ignored completely and even now is broadcast exclusively in Scotland every other week or so. Is it really of lower quality and interest than a National League game in England that's on Sky/BT every week?
That doesn't really matter. If you live in Stockport, you'll be interested in the National League as some of the clubs will be local to you, you'll have likes and dislikes, some of your mates will support the clubs involved.
What's that person's motivation for watching Partick Thistle against Ayr? Even if it is exciting. English football has its own excitement every season.
Could you tell me how exciting the Northern Irish or Welsh leagues are this year? I've got no idea. It's not relevant to me at all.
There will never be interest in our game in England beyond football geeks and people with links to Scotland. And that's fine.
0 -
3 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:
It is different, and I’m not suggesting Scottish football receive the same treatment. I’m merely highlighting that it’s within the BBC’s gift to give Scottish football an increased level of coverage either at a uk level or regionally, and it would have an impact if it did.
It’s not unreasonable to suggest that the current output is pretty risible from a national broadcaster. The regional output is a reflection of the funding from the overall bbc. As the BBC’s national coverage becomes less relevant anyway, it could reinvent itself at least in part as a champion of regional coverage - but it won’t.
I think there's a circular aspect that is related to the tv coverage our own league provides.
All your average English punter ever sees of our league is Livi v Celtic, Killie v Rangers, Hibs v Celtic, Motherwell v Rangers...
A lot of these games are attack against defence with an inevitable outcome. And, given that nothing else is ever televised, people assume that's all there is. I've taken mates to Tynecastle who have been genuinely surprised how professional and high-quality the whole thing is, as they tend to think it's essentially amateur stuff.
That's basically the impression our league gives off, so there's no demand for any coverage. It starts with our clubs.
0 -
4 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:
I’ve lived there too and I know they don’t care. But you’re being naive if you think that isn’t at least in part influenced by media coverage. It’s played a key part in women’s football. Increased coverage means increased interest, which leads to increased investment which leads to the quality improving which drives more interest. It’s a self fulfilling cycle.
It's not quite the same thing. Women's football happens in England and is of interest to the local population.
Of course media attention drives interest, but to what end would there be media attention on Scottish football in England? What does the local population do with that?
There's only so much space, and England is a more multi-sport envronment than Scotland as well. They've got the Premier League, well-supported lower league, cricket, rugby, etc to cover. It's a very hard sell to say that their audience is being served in any way by shoe-horning in coverage of something that just isn't relevant to them.
We have our own coverage. It may be shite, but that's a different issue.
The plus side to all this is that most of my English mates have absolutely no idea Hearts have been relegated twice in the last decade. Didn't register at all. Which is nice. Most folk reckon we're still owned by that Latvian/Russian/foreign guy.
0 -
Just now, eez-eh said:
That they shouldn’t be defacto English stations. I don’t think anyone is contesting that they are.
Why are you struggling so much to grasp that?
And why are you being such a condescending w**k?
Jesus Christ.
Good night to you.
0 -
Just now, stu2910 said:
This is missing the point entirely though. Why do people in Scotland care about English football? The very top teams fine, but why are people watching Blackburn v Sheff We’d earlier today? Is it because it’s so much better than Motherwell v Aberdeen?
f**k me.
BECAUSE IT'S QUITE GOOD.
And, to be honest, aye, it is miles better than Motherwell v Aberdeen.
1 -
Just now, eez-eh said:
No. When did I say that?
So what's your fucking point?
BBC One and Five Live are defacto English stations. If you haven't grasped this, then I can'thelp you.
Scotland has its own BBC media. They cover Scottish football. Absolutely nobody who isn;t accessing BBC Scotland's Scottish football coverage in the UK gives a flying f**k about Scottish football, so it is not widely covered elsewhere.
What part of this is difficult for you?
The BBC's regional English output is irrelevant in all of this. English people find English football interesting. They do not find Scottish football interesting.
Do. You. Get. It?
0
Jimmy Thelin - Aberdeen's new Manager
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted
Yet, here we are.
We're in a miles better place than Aberdeen any way you cut it.