I suppose the divide is between those who need to balance the books and those to whom money is no object. Those I'd class in that 2nd category are the Manchester clubs and Chelsea only.
It's sad to admit but Villa, barring a drastic change of rules or takeover, are never going to be able to win the league again. It's just not possible.Clubs like us, Everton, and plenty others who have had success in the past, can forget about challenging for titles. It does make you wonder what the point of it all is.
Quote from: Nev on September 09, 2011, 10:40:57 AMWe know it's true, so do the players, I just don't like hearing the manager say it.You approach it in two ways. Be positive without being unrealistic or be negative and like any manager in any business your staff end up being de-motivated and will consider other options.It's this sort of attitude, coupled with the style and approach to the first few games that confirm my, and many others, reservations about having this guy in charge.I feel inclined to agree with this. I think, given the climate of football at the moment and the fact that we are not in a position to financially compete with certain clubs, I would rather we had appointed a real Villa man to lead us through these unchartered territories. My big worry about McLeish is that he is indoctrinated into this present day system of football, a paid up Fergie disciple who buys into the Sky TV perception of how football works. He's part and parcel of the "industry", if you will. One of the things I look for in a Villa manager is pride in our club and a bullishness. I don't think McLeish has the nous to think outside the box and lift the club, to take the way the "industry" currently is and to say to hell with it, I can still beat the lot of them. Calling other clubs "superclubs" isn't the best way to motivate Aston Villa players or supporters, in my view. It's one thing being realistic and saying other clubs have more resources than us at the moment, but calling them superclubs immediately gives them the upper hand over us when we get to play them. Placing other clubs on a pedestal and making us sound inferior is just downright poor leadership in my view. There's a fine line between calling other clubs superclubs and running on the pitch with an Arsenal shirt for Thierry Henry to sign.
We know it's true, so do the players, I just don't like hearing the manager say it.You approach it in two ways. Be positive without being unrealistic or be negative and like any manager in any business your staff end up being de-motivated and will consider other options.It's this sort of attitude, coupled with the style and approach to the first few games that confirm my, and many others, reservations about having this guy in charge.
Quote from: pauliewalnuts on September 09, 2011, 11:59:11 AMIt's sad to admit but Villa, barring a drastic change of rules or takeover, are never going to be able to win the league again. It's just not possible.Clubs like us, Everton, and plenty others who have had success in the past, can forget about challenging for titles. It does make you wonder what the point of it all is.Probably the same as the point has always been for 70-odd clubs. The difference now is that it's 80-odd.
You can't really argue with what he said, but it does add to the feeling that we've given up and are resigned to making up the numbers. Even though results were shite under GH, at least he seemed (at times) to communicate the belief that we could become competitive without the money of the super clubs. I feel that we lost that sometime during the summer.
Quote from: dave.woodhall on September 09, 2011, 12:00:44 PMQuote from: pauliewalnuts on September 09, 2011, 11:59:11 AMIt's sad to admit but Villa, barring a drastic change of rules or takeover, are never going to be able to win the league again. It's just not possible.Clubs like us, Everton, and plenty others who have had success in the past, can forget about challenging for titles. It does make you wonder what the point of it all is.Probably the same as the point has always been for 70-odd clubs. The difference now is that it's 80-odd. Not for £40 a ticket though.
Spurs, I think, are realising that qualifying for the CL once is not enough, you have got to do it nigh-on year in, year out.I think the situation we have now is that Liverpool have been on the slide for a while (revenues, small stadium, not in the CL) and are currently having one big roll of the dice to claw back what they've lost.Spurs aren't going to be making the kind of investment necessary to buy year in, year out CL football.Arsenal are really feeling the fact that there's a financial gulf between themselves and the top echelon of the English game.I thikn we will have a scenario where Man United, Man City and Chelsea basically share the league titles, and this will go on until someone comes along and makes a vast investment in a club (and given that this has only ever happened in this country twice, it probably won't happen for a long time), or the rules change massively.Effectively, we are getting a situation very similar to the Spanish league, where two clubs share all the silverware, and there's a massive gulf to the rest, except in our case it'll be three clubs.