I like Burn but I just hoped for a better option. Targett was ****e every time I saw him last year, but Villa fans warned me that he usually plays well until he gets a contract, then his head drops a bit. I get he didn't get regular time, but if Dan Burn playing as a LB is keeping you out of the team despite you being the only natural LB we have, then that says something. I'm not saying Burn is crap. Targett may not be terrible, I just wanted an upgrade. Why settle for Burn and Targett? Why settle when were a top 4 team who can afford better?
I reckon if we’d had a normal season targett would have got back in. The whole thing with a squad is if you okay well and the team gets a result and you don’t personally **** up then you should keep the shirt. That’s what happened. And if targett doesn’t like it then he can either fight like **** for the shirt or piss off down the leagues because he will never play for a bigger club again.
I'll agree with this. The main issue for me is Burn covering two positions. If he gets injured or suspended then we're struggling for good enough quality depth at LB and CB... We need to strengthen one or the other (or both!) of those positions to reduce that risk. For me, preferably adding some more quality and pace at CB first.
Dummet in theory covers both. Remember we need 8 English and 4 homegrown for Europe. Live him or loathe him he’s in that squad for a reason. I’ll trust the gaffer on what he brings to the club. But I get the doubts over him. What I would say is I’ve seen improvement in players that I never thought possible that have done well when given the chance. Who knows, Dummet could be another. He wasn’t the first that went to **** under the fat **** that managed us prior to Eddie. Some have been re-born. I’d say just trust in the process.
How many times did Targett get to play - you genuinely can't expect a guy who's been sat on his arse either injured or on the bench to drop in and put in a world class performance. There's a huge difference between fit and match ready Burn spent most of the season there as it allowed us to go to a back three when Trippier pushed on, so more working to Howe's game plan than a reflection of Targett's ability when available I'd still agree that a better LB could be sought however
The point I'm trying to make is that we should be able to find better than Burn and Targett. Burn is decent cover, and the fact that targett was on the bench implies that eddie preferred Burn playing their over him, implying Targett is a lesser option to Burn. I'm not saying Targett and Burn are poor, I don't understand why people think it's an insult to a player if you suggest we can simply do better than him. He may be decent but I'm saying we could do better. That's all. I see no evidence that Targett is better than Burn defensively. Offensively maybe, but not defensively.
This just isn't correct, sorry. Burn was LB in the best defence in the league.How, just how in anyone's mind could he have justified dropping him? You can't say it implies Targett is a lesser option, it's just that when Burn had his chance, he was essentially undroppable. Targett didn't let us down when he did play, but never got a run, understandably in my eyes. I personally think that to make the step up and to balance the attacking options on our wings, specifically as we play inverted wingers, we need a better ATTACKING option from LB, but we have 2 very good options there right now. It's very short sighted to say otherwise.
Again, I'm not saying he's bad, I'm saying we could do better. He's not a liability, he's not just got a high ceiling. He's limited. We can do better =/= our current option is bad.
Give over lads. Burn is a liability. He was lucky to have the collossas that is Botman mopping up after him
