Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: pauliewalnuts on January 12, 2013, 07:57:55 PM
-
Interesting stuff on Twitter today, from Matt Law of the Sunday Mirror, who is also a Villa fan, but which I thought absolutely smacked the nail on the head in terms of where we are and where we're going.
Badly run clubs eventually pay for it. Villa are paying for it and look like going down.
and then:
@StanCollymore Boro, Newcastle, West Ham were all badly run clubs that paid for it - Villa very similar at the moment.
This to me sounds like a pretty astute observation.
He then went on to say:
@StanCollymore You can't go from A (paying 60k a week) to C (paying 15k a week) without doing B, which is what Villa have tried to do
which to me hits the nail squarely on the head.
I can't help but think we're struggling against the tide here, and paying for sins which go way beyond what we see on the pitch week in, week out.
Unfortunately, since MON flounced, it has become more and more clear that having a domineering, club-running manager was covering up the cracks in the rest of the management of the club. Once we were left with them to run things, we started on a sequence of dreadful decisions which have led us to where we are now.
The Houllier appointment wasn't such a bad one on the surface of it, but we struggled, and we spent to stay up. Towards the end of that season, we were showing distinct signs of improvement, and finished ninth. It looked like the money was paying dividends. He then gets ill, can't come back, and we're looking for a manager again. We then have a frankly embarassing saga of a managerial hunt which ends up with an appointment which wasn't just poorly judged on the basis of the guy's record, but made zero sense in terms of continuity. Starting to play football and then back we go to a traditional, outdated playing style. Ask yourself, what kind of joined-up policy at board level has you going to talk to Roberto Martinez one day, then Alex McLeish the next? Where on earth is the bigger picture in that? That appointment was the point at which the scales tipped, in my opinion.
Over the last three years we have lost some excellent players, and replaced them with poor imitations (if we've replaced them at all). The chairman and his CEO have decided we're going to become Ajax - somehow - an approach which fits conveniently with their dogmatic approach to the wage bill, and here we are with a squad which is part inexperienced kids who aren't ready to be thrown into it all together, and part older, experienced players who look like they don't care.
If you look at the experiences of the clubs mentioned above:
Boro - spent big, trying to live the dream, spent so big that when they tried to claw back the money, they did it way too quickly, and got relegated.
Newcastle - one poor managerial appointment after another, a novice to the football industry takes over, ultimately relegation.
West Ham - a ridiculous transfer policy from previous owners (that sounds familiar, except with us it was a previous manager) draining the club of money. Ultimately, relegated.
It's really hard to look at that and say that there isn't a distinct pattern there, and that we do not fit in with it. We do, perfectly.
And that is the worst thing about where we are today. It's not a squad of decent players being let down by a clueless manager, and I suspect it's not a case of the manager losing the dressing room, either. The problem is that we are led by people who do not know what they are doing. We've clawed back on the wage bill - something that needed to be done - but we have done it way, way too quickly, and as a result have a squad that looks like it belongs in the championship, and will probably end up there - in the season in which the TV money increases massively, so much so that it would solve the fabled wage bill problem overnight.
We spent some decent money in the summer, but every one of them of the profile that would fit with adding as little as possible to the wage bill. We have young players we have either grown or bought, like Westwood, Lowton, Baker, Bannan, Stevens, Bennett et al, who may turn out to be brilliant players in the future, but right now they're all being thrown into it together, week after week, and we're watching their confidence rapidly disappearing. They're basically getting ruined in front of us, week in, week out. That is a direct result of decisions taken at the very top of the club.
Changing the manager now is not going to change this. The owner randomly throwing a huge amount of money at it again might change it for a while, but ultimately, it'll probably just going to be delaying the inevitable. Lambert is just one of the players in a gradual process of disintegration. There's a malaise at the club which is dragging us down.
I don't want Randy Lerner to just magic up an enormous sum of money and throw it at the club with the vain hope that some of it makes a difference. I want him to start to run this club sensibly, in a way that does not mean boom or bust. If he can't do it himself, and is inclined to stay as remote and detached as he is currently, then he needs to put people in at the club who know what they are doing, because right now, it all looks like an amateurish, ill-judged mess, which is doomed to end in tears.
-
Other good examples are Blues and Leeds.
Clubs who are run well, but manage to just about survive are Wigan. Although DW is a prick and I'd love them to go.
-
Yep. Randy cannot run a tap let alone a football club, ask a Brown's fan.
-
Paulie, I don't know what to add to your post. For me you've hit the nail on the head. Lambert isn't blameless, but he's not the biggest cause of our malaise. It's Lerner, Faulkner and their years of mismanagement. It's not easy for us to solve and it definitely won't be the kind of thing that can be resolved in time to save our season. It's sad.
-
Very good post and right on the money.
-
If we can't or won't pay premiership wages then we won't get premiership players. If we don't get premiership players we won't be playing in the premiership for very long. What's so hard about understanding that?
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
Well it's about time we told them.
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
You just need to look at the figures.
How much money have we invested, or spent on players since 2006, and where are we now, and how strong does our squad look? That says it all.
The squad is the club's main asset. Of course, the manager has a massive input on that, but managers come and go, it is up to the owner to set the limits on spending, to ensure that his manager really manages that asset, and that it is renewed or improved as it needs to be, that as much value remains in it as possible.
On that front, Lerner has been an utter disaster.
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
You just need to look at the figures.
How much money have we invested, or spent on players since 2006, and where are we now, and how strong does our squad look? That says it all.
The squad is the club's main asset. Of course, the manager has a massive input on that, but managers come and go, it is up to the owner to set the limits on spending, to ensure that his manager really manages that asset, and that it is renewed or improved as it needs to be, that as much value remains in it as possible.
On that front, Lerner has been an utter disaster.
The money we've spent on compensating former managers alone is staggering. How much we had to pay SHA for poaching TSM and then TSM himself for fucking him off is scandalous, especially when you consider there were only two, possibly, three men on the face of the earth who thought appointing him was a good idea.
-
So depressed. You can change players and change a Manager if they aren't performing. But an owner............
I'm having real trouble working out how we're going to get out of this one. Quite surprised the Board aren't getting more stick from the terraces. Perhaps he does but it isn't coming over on the TV.
-
Over £250m spent and here we are hanging our to our Premier League existence by our fingernails, hoping against hope that a random bunch of kids will somehow find the quality to keep us up. People keep saying "it could be worse, we could have Venky's" but the end result looks like being exactly the same, and if anything having spent so much money, it's an even worse performance. We're trying to stay ahead of teams who have spent a fraction of what we have, and have long been passed by other better run teams like Stoke, Swanse and Norwich. Lerner is the worst owner in the Premier League, even worse than that pair of twats at West Ham.
-
The money we've spent on compensating former managers alone is staggering. How much we had to pay SHA for poaching TSM and then TSM himself for fucking him off is scandalous, especially when you consider there were only two, possibly, three men on the face of the earth who thought appointing him was a good idea.
The whole concept of having to *pay* Small Heath for the manager who had just got them relegated whilst playing the most nauseatingly sterile brand of football seen for years is just incredible, but yep, we did that.
-
I think the appointment of Houllier, purely on health grounds alone, was crazy. Such is Houllier's condition I wouldn't have have felt comfortable giving him a job as a teacher let alone re-appoint him as a Premier League manager. Common sense should have told our Boardroom that, at best, it would be a very short term appointment. Utterly bizarre.
I don't blame Lambert for where we are at the moment, I lay the blame firmly at Randy Lerner's door. The parallels with Doug Ellis' rapid cost-cutting in the mid-eighties are there for all to see, too.
-
My bss is a big Wednesday fan and he often recounted to me how the club sold its best players in the early to mid 1990s. Their ultimately relegation (and this is a big club) from the PL was predictable and inevitable.
I truly believe that not only is our demise inevitable, I think we also will slide even further as did Wednesday. Lets hope Lerner sells up after the first relegation.
-
This club is sleepwalking to Division 1 - shambles.
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
-
The money we've spent on compensating former managers alone is staggering. How much we had to pay SHA for poaching TSM and then TSM himself for fucking him off is scandalous, especially when you consider there were only two, possibly, three men on the face of the earth who thought appointing him was a good idea.
The whole concept of having to *pay* Small Heath for the manager who had just got them relegated whilst playing the most nauseatingly sterile brand of football seen for years is just incredible, but yep, we did that.
This for me very much sums up the inept manner in which the senior management run the club.
-
Minor failing's,dear God don't feed him.
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
True.
But why?
-
You'll never get some on here to accept we're a badly run club.
True.
But why?
God knows, because - and I have no pleasure in being right - some of us have been saying it for an awfully long time.
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
Fuck all wrong with a cold bath full of San Miguel 8)
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
Fuck all wrong with a cold bath full of San Miguel 8)
We're minesweeping for lukewarm halves of Amstel
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
Fuck all wrong with a cold bath full of San Miguel 8)
We're minesweeping for lukewarm halves of Amstel
Skol skol skol skol skol skol skol skol skol.
-
Jesus, I really picked the wrong month to decide to go tee total didn't I!!!
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
It's far from the only criteria.
How about four successive years of huge losses in the accounts? Check
Selling all of the valuable assets of the company and replacing them with inferior replacements? Check
A falling and unhappy consumer base? Check
Likely to miss out on a huge increase in turnover as a result of getting relegated? Check
Poor customer relations and no apparent strategy for success? Check
A feeble and ineffective board led by somebody completely out of his depth? Check
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
Fuck all wrong with a cold bath full of San Miguel 8)
Full English in the afternoon, 12 bottles of Sami and 20 cheap bennies. The cornerstone of every 80's holiday.
-
I doubt this is the first we will see of this view now , we are the biggest club in trouble now and the media are having a field day.
The fact is we spent more than Spurs net had a higher wage bill and look at us ..utter shambles.We sold Downing ,Milner and Young and wasted the cash we got in.The managerial appointments have been a disaster and I am starting to class Lambert in with that too.
-
Even if we escape relegation this year, with Randy's grip on the purse strings, does anyone really believe that it we wont be battling relegation again next year? Its been like this for 3 seasons now, I'm getting tired of it, and if you take out the MON era, its been like it since midway through Gregory's reign as manager, give or take a season.
-
What well run club with its fans having endured the excruciating humiliation at the hands of Bradford just three days before would put the name of that club in huge black letters on the television screen at the game on every conceivable opportunity?
-
It is getting harder and harder to defend the way our club is being run. Footballing decisions throughout the club have been appalling for too long, from the types of contracts handed out, wages, players bought at cost and not used, managerial appointments and even as far back as dropping out of Europe to try and finish fourth. All in all its been a shambles and we have been going down hill for some time.
This approach of Lambert's (whether it is self inflicted or if he is working within constraints of the club) might have worked if he was appointed this season after we had been relegated from TSM reign. However I really can not see him turning it around at all now. I really thought he was the man for the job, but he looks so defeated now.
There has been glimpses, not many mind, of promise and at times I was waiting for it too come good and go on a run. We have gone a run, but a run I never expected. Injuries have not helped as our squad is thread bear. The term 'Men against boys' certainly springs to mind.
-
I agree, Things started getting worse as soon as Randy had to start making important decisions.
But I do think that if we stay up and yes that's a big IF then Lambert is the right man who can take us forward with the criteria our shambolic club have set.
-
And that's the thing. I think IF we can stay up then Lambert will be great for us and the kids will mature into a decent side with the addition of some older heads. But you just can't play them all now.
We are in an absolute mess right now though and everyone looks shell shocked.
This doesn't excuse Randy's appalling decision making but we could be great in 2/3 years time if they stick together. Let's hope we've not ruined them by then.
-
As I've said previously Villa really miss Steve Stride right now. We look a bit rudderless, and a young MBNA executive with no previous football experience is not going to save us. I do not harp back to the days of Doug, per se, but I definitely feel we need someone who's been in this fairly unique business for a while and to me, the only way we can do that is to move heaven and earth to get Steve to come home. I don't know if he ever would, but if he did I think things may well be somewhat more stable.
As an aside, Paul McGrath tweeted on us today and made me laugh, though I suppose today is a laugh-or-cry day:
Villa players show some bottle .no pun intended jasus please .
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
It's far from the only criteria.
How about four successive years of huge losses in the accounts? Check
Selling all of the valuable assets of the company and replacing them with inferior replacements? Check
A falling and unhappy consumer base? Check
Likely to miss out on a huge increase in turnover as a result of getting relegated? Check
Poor customer relations and no apparent strategy for success? Check
A feeble and ineffective board led by somebody completely out of his depth? Check
For a start off, just because I conclude that Villa is not a badly run club, does not mean that you must agree, I am only stating my own view.
But if you insist on a critique of your list of criteria, I would say that it is logically flawed because most of the items on the list are mutually exclusive.
So you can't possible list huge losses as a bad thing and then claim that the result of solving that bad thing - selling the causes of those losses, is a bad thing: that is logically inconsistent.
You have to choose.
Your only real unassailable standpoint is that as a consumer of the football product you should not be required to concern yourself with the long-term sustainability of the company providing the service, just as you could not be expected to concern yourself with any other company which was supplying you with a service at a loss.
Stating that consumers of Villa's football product are were happier when that product was supplied at a loss, is not saying anything much, except to say that most consumers are happy to get products and services at a loss.
Again I ask: Birmingham City? Leeds? Newcastle?
Try making a comparison between Liverpool's downgrade and Villa's - which seems to provide a more realistic comparison.
-
I think Liverpool are just us but two years behind. They got an American owner with a background of sport franchise administration and that owner threw a huge dollop of money at the first manager they chose. KKK did much the same as MON and pissed most of the money up the wall and got replaced. Liverpool are now in phase 2 of american model ownership getting some more money but not enough to satisfy their folie de grandeur. They will bump along a downward slope until they hit the levels we are already at.
English football has reached the point where only limitless financial investment can deliver secure top level football in the premiership. Any other club, ours included, which tries to survive within its means will yo yo. One day in the distant future reality will reassert itself but not until the communists regain power in Russia, the oil runs out and Ferguson's luck runs out.
-
At least the Red Sox won the World Series.
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
It's far from the only criteria.
How about four successive years of huge losses in the accounts? Check
Selling all of the valuable assets of the company and replacing them with inferior replacements? Check
A falling and unhappy consumer base? Check
Likely to miss out on a huge increase in turnover as a result of getting relegated? Check
Poor customer relations and no apparent strategy for success? Check
A feeble and ineffective board led by somebody completely out of his depth? Check
For a start off, just because I conclude that Villa is not a badly run club, does not mean that you must agree, I am only stating my own view.
But if you insist on a critique of your list of criteria, I would say that it is logically flawed because most of the items on the list are mutually exclusive.
So you can't possible list huge losses as a bad thing and then claim that the result of solving that bad thing - selling the causes of those losses, is a bad thing: that is logically inconsistent.
You have to choose.
Your only real unassailable standpoint is that as a consumer of the football product you should not be required to concern yourself with the long-term sustainability of the company providing the service, just as you could not be expected to concern yourself with any other company which was supplying you with a service at a loss.
Stating that consumers of Villa's football product are were happier when that product was supplied at a loss, is not saying anything much, except to say that most consumers are happy to get products and services at a loss.
Again I ask: Birmingham City? Leeds? Newcastle?
Try making a comparison between Liverpool's downgrade and Villa's - which seems to provide a more realistic comparison.
Cant you see that if we go down for the want of spending 30 Million then we will miss out on 70 million?
If we go down we will stay down for a very long time, this squad is barely championship level let alone premiership.
How do you go from a squad capable of finishing 6th three years running to this?
Randy has fucked it up.
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
It's far from the only criteria.
How about four successive years of huge losses in the accounts? Check
Selling all of the valuable assets of the company and replacing them with inferior replacements? Check
A falling and unhappy consumer base? Check
Likely to miss out on a huge increase in turnover as a result of getting relegated? Check
Poor customer relations and no apparent strategy for success? Check
A feeble and ineffective board led by somebody completely out of his depth? Check
For a start off, just because I conclude that Villa is not a badly run club, does not mean that you must agree, I am only stating my own view.
But if you insist on a critique of your list of criteria, I would say that it is logically flawed because most of the items on the list are mutually exclusive.
So you can't possible list huge losses as a bad thing and then claim that the result of solving that bad thing - selling the causes of those losses as a bad thing: that is logically inconsistent.
You have to choose.
Your only real unassailable standpoint is that as a consumer of the football product you should not be required to concern yourself with the long-term sustainability of the company providing the service, just as you could not be expected to concern yourself with any other company which was supplying you with a service at a loss.
Stating that consumers of Villa's football product are were happier when that product was supplied at a loss, is not saying anything much, except to say that most consumers are happy to get products and services at a loss.
Again I ask: Birmingham City? Leeds? Newcastle?
Try making a comparison between Liverpool's downgrade and Villa's - which seems to provide a more realistic comparison.
Not sure I follow all your arguments, but a recurrent theme in your defence in Villa being a well run club is that when Lerner was spending cash we acheived on the pitch and nobody complained.
Two points to make on this. Firstly Lerner's management team were one trick ponies. The only plan they had was to spend money on players - and this simply wasn't sustainable. Relying on unsustainable levels of spending with no credible plans to increase revenue is surely the definition of poor management.
Secondly, there were a number of people on this site saying that it was unsustainable at the time and these people were also concerned about the financial structuring of loans to fund the spending. Sure they were in the minority, but not everyone was simply was satisfied with your bread and circuses line.
-
Your only real unassailable standpoint is that as a consumer of the football product you should not be required to concern yourself with the long-term sustainability of the company providing the service, just as you could not be expected to concern yourself with any other company which was supplying you with a service at a loss.
Stating that consumers of Villa's football product are were happier when that product was supplied at a loss, is not saying anything much, except to say that most consumers are happy to get products and services at a loss.
This seems flawed to me.
If a service, as you put it, is one you sign up for for life then I think you are entitled to be concerned for its wellbeing. It doesn't have to be run at a loss to satisfy its customers who want to see it do well, they would be satisfied to see the owners stop making avoidable errors.
-
Lerner is the root cause of the past three years of hell.
-
And that's the thing. I think IF we can stay up then Lambert will be great for us and the kids will mature into a decent side with the addition of some older heads. But you just can't play them all now.
We are in an absolute mess right now though and everyone looks shell shocked.
This doesn't excuse Randy's appalling decision making but we could be great in 2/3 years time if they stick together. Let's hope we've not ruined them by then.
If we keep the same business model, as soon as the kids mature they must be sold. We won't be able to pay prem wages. It's not like these kids will have us pushing for Europe, the good ones will want away as soon as someone half decent come sniffing around.
The more you think about how we've been going the last 2-3 yrs relegation is an inevitability.
-
Excellent thread but the more you think about it the more it is common sense. Badly run businesses go bust, badly run hospitals require government bale outs & badly run banks got the country in the shite.
And yes badly run football clubs do badly..................
-
Randy let MON spunk all the money of the holiday on the first couple of nights on cocktails and lap dancing. We are now struggling to survive the rest of holiday on bottles of San Miguel cooling in the bath before the plane home.
Fuck all wrong with a cold bath full of San Miguel 8)
We're minesweeping for lukewarm halves of Amstel
Skol skol skol skol skol skol skol skol skol.
San Miguel, Amstel and Skol - these three beers sum up our team perfectly - gash beers
-
The initial post is persuasive.
Would you have any confidence that if Lambert was sacked they would appoint a decent manager and support him sufficiently? No. What decent manager would look at Villa and consider it a place where he could build a successful career? Martinez took a look and saw better prospects with Wigan.
The manager is not the issue. In fact, like the players the manager has probably lost his confidence a little bit.
So where does the ultimate responsibility for leadership lie? The board. I reminded myself of the make up of the board (http://www.avfc.co.uk/page/WhosWho):
Randolph Lerner - Chairman
Paul Faulkner - Chief Executive Officer
Robin Russell - Chief Financial Officer
General Charles C. Krulak - Non-Executive Director
A board packed full of Lerner's men.
Lerner himself, having sold the Cleveland Browns after a similar period of non-success. Check out this article (http://www.cleveland.com/livingston/index.ssf/2012/08/randy_lerners_reign_over_the_c.html) for example, which describes his succession of poor managing appointments. Or this one (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1279288-cleveland-browns-new-owner-has-chance-to-avoid-bad-pattern-set-by-lerner), which describes the Browns as having 'rebooted' their coaching staff and team management every 2.8 years under the Lerner family.
Faulkner, young, previous professional experience 'Relationship Manager' at a bank-holding company also run by Lerner, with an arts degree.
Krulak, who made a fool of himself on here, a former marine with previous professional experience working for Lerner.
There is no football nous on the board, nor independence. It is ostensibly Lerner and some yes-men. It's Lerner's team.
There are two possibilities for positive change from here.
Firstly, Lambert succeeds. Avoids relegation, ships overpaid/poor players over summer, and gets money to buy new ones who play well.
Or, Lerner relinquishes control. Either by selling or by making himself the chairman of a board of independent people with experience running sports teams successfully. To do that, he would himself have to move out Faulkner and Krulak. What chance in a four member board. Has anyone come across, or have an idea as to how to find, the club's constitution?
-
It depends on what you mean by the consumer being "happy" to be provided with a service run at a loss. I would like my milkman to charge me under the odds for his milk but I have the intelligence to realize that if I want a milkman he has to survive. I might get cheap milk for a week or a month or two but without him I would finish up having to drive two miles to and from the village Co op.
The Premiership is bloated with the hot money of sheikhs and oligarchs. It will morph into show business. A super jumbo plane will fly eight clubs around the world to play mini knockouts. The level of actual sport will be somewhere between Indian limited overs cricket and the Harlem Globetrotters.
-
@StanCollymore You can't go from A (paying 60k a week) to C (paying 15k a week) without doing B, which is what Villa have tried to do
Yup. At the time the cut-backs started, pelty came on here and gave a fair tilt at putting Randy's point of view, i.e. he couldn't keep pumping money in at the rate he was having to, but he agreed that, in his opinion, it was ll too abruptly.
That abruptness convinced me (wrongly) that the cut-backs must be temporary and that we'd go again (sorry to use that phrase) once a course correction had been made.
The above and the capricious managerial appointments have been a perfect recipe.
-
I wanted Doug out probably from soon after he came back, but one thing about him is he was here. Like him or loathe him he knew what was going on around the club and wasn't thousands of miles away. If a manager had a problem he could go round his house and talk face to face, not conference call him. I'm not sure you can get a feel of how things are going from a monthly report e-mailed from your manager or CEO.
And thats the problem. Villa was Doug's life, its not even a hobby for Lerner. Whether he's ploughing a fortune in or cutting to the bone he seems to have no real interest or enthusiasm in the club - we're just an expensive toy he bought one year which he's grown bored with. I really don't think he cares if we go down or if he loses a fortune. I think he'll sell, take the massive financial hit and put it down to experience but for now i don't think there's much we can do about it. He's always been a driver asleep at the wheel, we just didn't notice until the road went round a bend.
-
What well run club with its fans having endured the excruciating humiliation at the hands of Bradford just three days before would put the name of that club in huge black letters on the television screen at the game on every conceivable opportunity?
It is almost like we are in the Southern League and Bradford are in the Fourth Division. I don't need them to harp on about great nights against Chester, Blackburn and Tranmere. We know all about those games and how we got in that predicament.
-
I wanted Doug out probably from soon after he came back, but one thing about him is he was here. Like him or loathe him he knew what was going on around the club and wasn't thousands of miles away. If a manager had a problem he could go round his house and talk face to face, not conference call him. I'm not sure you can get a feel of how things are going from a monthly report e-mailed from your manager or CEO.
And thats the problem. Villa was Doug's life, its not even a hobby for Lerner. Whether he's ploughing a fortune in or cutting to the bone he seems to have no real interest or enthusiasm in the club - we're just an expensive toy he bought one year which he's grown bored with. I really don't think he cares if we go down or if he loses a fortune. I think he'll sell, take the massive financial hit and put it down to experience but for now i don't think there's much we can do about it. He's always been a driver asleep at the wheel, we just didn't notice until the road went round a bend.
Correct. All made worse by his representative on here who promised the earth, then fucked off when the going got tough.
-
Faulkner, young, previous professional experience 'Relationship Manager' at a bank-holding company also run by Lerner, with an arts degree.
You can imagine seasoned football administrators, twice Faulkner's age running rings round him.
As soon as John Williams (a VERY well respected Football Administrator) resigned from Blackburn, Man City couldn't hire him quick enough. They might have a shitload of cash, but they are also very astute. They recognised the need for someone like that, with the contacts and the experience.
We dont.
-
I wanted Doug out probably from soon after he came back, but one thing about him is he was here. Like him or loathe him he knew what was going on around the club and wasn't thousands of miles away. If a manager had a problem he could go round his house and talk face to face, not conference call him. I'm not sure you can get a feel of how things are going from a monthly report e-mailed from your manager or CEO.
And thats the problem. Villa was Doug's life, its not even a hobby for Lerner. Whether he's ploughing a fortune in or cutting to the bone he seems to have no real interest or enthusiasm in the club - we're just an expensive toy he bought one year which he's grown bored with. I really don't think he cares if we go down or if he loses a fortune. I think he'll sell, take the massive financial hit and put it down to experience but for now i don't think there's much we can do about it. He's always been a driver asleep at the wheel, we just didn't notice until the road went round a bend.
Correct. All made worse by his representative on here who promised the earth, then fucked off when the going got tough.
....and took that nauseating "Proud History, Bright Future" bollocks with him.
-
I wanted Doug out probably from soon after he came back, but one thing about him is he was here. Like him or loathe him he knew what was going on around the club and wasn't thousands of miles away. If a manager had a problem he could go round his house and talk face to face, not conference call him. I'm not sure you can get a feel of how things are going from a monthly report e-mailed from your manager or CEO.
And thats the problem. Villa was Doug's life, its not even a hobby for Lerner. Whether he's ploughing a fortune in or cutting to the bone he seems to have no real interest or enthusiasm in the club - we're just an expensive toy he bought one year which he's grown bored with. I really don't think he cares if we go down or if he loses a fortune. I think he'll sell, take the massive financial hit and put it down to experience but for now i don't think there's much we can do about it. He's always been a driver asleep at the wheel, we just didn't notice until the road went round a bend.
I was sick of hearing Doug on the radio and TV, but I don't even know what Lerner sounds like!!
-
The General still has his name in the programme as a board member. Blokes like David Targett had his name in there as well. He died after coming back from a game at Middlesbrough. I can associate with men like David Targett and regret every bit of heckling I gave him and others at AGMs. Sorry for glorifying the days of Doug Ellis but, in my opinion, they were happier days.
-
Not long sold my last business and in fourteen years the longest holiday i took was ten days, and i had brilliant staff. Nobody runs a business better than the owner but to run it you have to be on site watching who goes where and who does what. Once Lerner decided to go part time and work by email and conference the game was up. We will only recover when he has gone.
-
The General still has his name in the programme as a board member. Blokes like David Targett had his name in there as well. He died after coming back from a game at Middlesbrough. I can associate with men like David Targett and regret every bit of heckling I gave him and others at AGMs. Sorry for glorifying the days of Doug Ellis but, in my opinion, they were happier days.
No need to apologise, you're quite correct. He had his faults but nothing feels as bad as this. At least he tended to learn from his mistakes.
-
The General still has his name in the programme as a board member. Blokes like David Targett had his name in there as well. He died after coming back from a game at Middlesbrough. I can associate with men like David Targett and regret every bit of heckling I gave him and others at AGMs. Sorry for glorifying the days of Doug Ellis but, in my opinion, they were happier days.
That whole disengagement procedure just said it all, really, showed how superficial and cynical it was.
Three years of telling us "don't worry about the money" as if we were witless children (when, it turns out, it was getting critical) and telling us "we're here through thick and thin", then the very moment thick turns to thin, they were off faster than a rat up a drainpipe.
Not only did they disappear from here, they couldn't even be arsed to drop a three line message telling us they were finished with us, which made the entire process look like a one-way marketing exercise which was dumped the minute it got awkward for them.
It may not have actually been that, but they quite clearly didn't give a shit about us thinking it was that.
-
Oh, and the same bullshit marketing slogan they used here, the General then re-uses in his new job.
What a fucking swindle.
-
My boss had half a notion of buying Rangers last year, might see if he fancies a cheeky offer to Lerner. £1 should swing it.
-
My boss had half a notion of buying Rangers last year, might see if he fancies a cheeky offer to Lerner. £1 should swing it.
Let's face it, brightly coloured beads would probably swing it.
-
Not long sold my last business and in fourteen years the longest holiday i took was ten days, and i had brilliant staff. Nobody runs a business better than the owner but to run it you have to be on site watching who goes where and who does what. Once Lerner decided to go part time and work by email and conference the game was up. We will only recover when he has gone.
yep. If your company was facing a financial black hole in 5 months time, you'd be sleeping in the office trying to sort it out. Lerner's just carrying on as before because frankly he's not that bothered.
-
Who is actually running this circus on a day to day basis? The Ginger Prince? And I don't mean Harry.
-
Not long sold my last business and in fourteen years the longest holiday i took was ten days, and i had brilliant staff. Nobody runs a business better than the owner but to run it you have to be on site watching who goes where and who does what. Once Lerner decided to go part time and work by email and conference the game was up. We will only recover when he has gone.
yep. If your company was facing a financial black hole in 5 months time, you'd be sleeping in the office trying to sort it out. Lerner's just carrying on as before because frankly he's not that bothered.
But..he's got a tattoo.
-
I just hope a new broom soon sweeps clean. We played Fulham a couple of years ago early in the season. Fayed walked across the pitch and waved and clapped the fans. He did this to all parts of the ground and they appreciated it. just a gesture but better than we get.
We have someone who very few know anything about. He lurks in the background occasionally, sells managers down the river and must be very embarrassed at games when the opponents officials flock around Doug Ellis, not even knowing who Lerner is.
It would be no worse if David Sullivan put himself in here as a poisonous curse.
-
I blame Faulkner more than Randy.
-
I blame Faulkner more than Randy.
Why? What is Paul's remit? The buck stops with Lerner as far as I am concerned.
-
I blame Faulkner more than Randy.
Why? What is Paul's remit? The buck stops with Lerner as far as I am concerned.
Faulkner is the CEO. He is overseeing a business which is failing big time. Lerner is the ultimate power who appointed Faulkner. Both of them have got a lot to answer for.
-
Why didn't we keep McAllister in charge after Houllier left - McAllister guided us to that end to the season with wins at Arse and home to Liverpool - I reckon he would have done a decent job. There are several key moments as to where the shitness was accelerated - firstly MON timing, then Houllier getting ill, then letting McAllister go in favour of McLeish - McLeish ffs. MCLEISH!
Actually while I am thinking about it - why can't we go and get McAllister back.
-
I blame Faulkner more than Randy.
Why? What is Paul's remit? The buck stops with Lerner as far as I am concerned.
Faulkner is the CEO. He is overseeing a business which is failing big time. Lerner is the ultimate power who appointed Faulkner. Both of them have got a lot to answer for.
I suspect it's mainly Lerner.
-
So do I. He's the money man, with the power to make decisions. If Faulkner is so inept, it's Lerner's fault he's still in a job. Same thing with Lambert.
-
I blame Faulkner more than Randy.
Why? What is Paul's remit? The buck stops with Lerner as far as I am concerned.
Back in March PF was saying the reserves would be used this season.I would doubt Randy knows what any of them look like.
-
His biggest weakness is the fact that he says the square root of fcuk all from one end of the year to next. How about telling us what the strategy of the club is - is it simply lower wages and sod the consequences. If this was Doug in charge, it wouldn't be this bad because he would fire the trigger on Lambert now, but likewise we would all be calling for him to go like we so often did so Randy isn't immune to criticism.
-
When I questioned what PFs remit was, I intended to explore whether the Manager makes all footballing decisions. What footballing decisions do we think PF makes, apart from being the fall guy in respect of managerial appointments and sackings? Lerner tells us nothing. They could have all manner of people advising them.
-
Why didn't we keep McAllister in charge after Houllier left - McAllister guided us to that end to the season with wins at Arse and home to Liverpool - I reckon he would have done a decent job. There are several key moments as to where the shitness was accelerated - firstly MON timing, then Houllier getting ill, then letting McAllister go in favour of McLeish - McLeish ffs. MCLEISH!
Actually while I am thinking about it - why can't we go and get McAllister back.
Because McAllister's record at every club is very poor and was not liked for his coaching and man management by the players,eg Dunne,Collins and Agbonlahor,the latter being very difficult to upset but McAllister managed to.
-
When I questioned what PFs remit was, I intended to explore whether the Manager makes all footballing decisions. What footballing decisions do we think PF makes, apart from being the fall guy in respect of managerial appointments and sackings? Lerner tells us nothing. They could have all manner of people advising them.
Nobody knows,but at the Brown's the GM ran everything.I see PF in that role for us.
-
When I questioned what PFs remit was, I intended to explore whether the Manager makes all footballing decisions. What footballing decisions do we think PF makes, apart from being the fall guy in respect of managerial appointments and sackings? Lerner tells us nothing. They could have all manner of people advising them.
I'd imagine that PF has a very large role in deciding the financial framework within which the manager works.
If he's not involved in that, what exactly is he doing? I'm pretty sure he's not limited to booking wedding parties and balti and chips events with former players.
Although the presence of that rat faced ****** Hodge today suggests he might be.
-
Tonight as I sit here typing this I imagine RL at home scared of the germs, counting his money, watching planes on his home cinema. His PA cutting his toe nails and arranging visiting time for his kids. Ever the practical that PA. As I go to bed, five hours behind, RL grabs his Aston Villa subuteo models and sets them up for a giant war against Godzilla and ManBearPig. His Benteke, KEA and Clarke models are wiped out but the Bent model stamps on the head of Godzilla and saves humanity. His PA is scurrying around, filling in forms with one hand, typing emails with another, whilst on the phone to Faulkner telling him Randy is locked in an important board meeting and can't take his call. His PA, desperate to get home to his Malibu Stacy figurines, explains down the line in a very patient manner that Randy can't sanction the purchase of another player.
-
You're saying what I've been saying but better lol. We cannot just keep changing managers the change has to come from the top
-
When I questioned what PFs remit was, I intended to explore whether the Manager makes all footballing decisions. What footballing decisions do we think PF makes, apart from being the fall guy in respect of managerial appointments and sackings? Lerner tells us nothing. They could have all manner of people advising them.
I'd imagine that PF has a very large role in deciding the financial framework within which the manager works.
If he's not involved in that, what exactly is he doing? I'm pretty sure he's not limited to booking wedding parties and balti and chips events with former players.
Although the presence of that rat faced c*** Hodge today suggests he might be.
With PF bigging up the reserves it's PF way.Why else would he say it.
-
How I pine for the days when The General was under fire for crap pies, lack of TV screens and dodgy intro music.
-
When I questioned what PFs remit was, I intended to explore whether the Manager makes all footballing decisions. What footballing decisions do we think PF makes, apart from being the fall guy in respect of managerial appointments and sackings? Lerner tells us nothing. They could have all manner of people advising them.
Nobody knows,but at the Brown's the GM ran everything.I see PF in that role for us.
My understanding has always been of Faulkner as Lerner's yes man diligently serving his master put in place after Pubey saw off the previous two Chief Execs. However, a couple of days back someone on here made a comment similar to what you say there that Lerner said in an interview that he leaves the day to day business to 'football people'. This leads me to ponder the unponderable. Just why does Lerner consider a former relationship manager from his credit card company to be a 'football person'? Did he once engage him in conversation about 'soccer' in the office once or something like that?
-
How I pine for the days when The General was under fire for crap pies, lack of TV screens and dodgy intro music.
But the pies are now great and we have our screen back! The problem is that everything else has fallen to shit.
-
Why didn't we keep McAllister in charge after Houllier left - McAllister guided us to that end to the season with wins at Arse and home to Liverpool - I reckon he would have done a decent job. There are several key moments as to where the shitness was accelerated - firstly MON timing, then Houllier getting ill, then letting McAllister go in favour of McLeish - McLeish ffs. MCLEISH!
Actually while I am thinking about it - why can't we go and get McAllister back.
Because McAllister's record at every club is very poor and was not liked for his coaching and man management by the players,eg Dunne,Collins and Agbonlahor,the latter being very difficult to upset but McAllister managed to.
I wonder why he upset those players though C&B? Maybe he had the temerity to point out that they weren't exactly pulling their weight and earning the very hefty sums of money they were being paid by the club. Maybe some of the more senior players had it cushy at the club and didn't like being told that they had to work harder and put some extra effort in.
I wasn't a fan of Houllier and Gary Mac, but after witnessing what has followed, they probably should have been given more time even if it meant Houllier taking up a more advisory role. I am certain that they would have cleared away a lot of the wasters who have been nothing short of liabilities over the past two seasons and are a big reason why we are in such a mess now.
-
How I pine for the days when The General was under fire for crap pies, lack of TV screens and dodgy intro music.
But the pies are now great and we have our screen back! The problem is that everything else has fallen to shit.
Well we got half of the old screen back. God knows what happened to the other half.
Bloody cutbacks! ;-)
-
It doesn't help that Randy owns the club fully ,no other share holders to really answer too.
-
Tonight as I sit here typing this I imagine RL at home scared of the germs, counting his money, watching planes on his home cinema. His PA cutting his toe nails and arranging visiting time for his kids. Ever the practical that PA. As I go to bed, five hours behind, RL grabs his Aston Villa subuteo models and sets them up for a giant war against Godzilla and ManBearPig. His Benteke, KEA and Clarke models are wiped out but the Bent model stamps on the head of Godzilla and saves humanity. His PA is scurrying around, filling in forms with one hand, typing emails with another, whilst on the phone to Faulkner telling him Randy is locked in an important board meeting and can't take his call. His PA, desperate to get home to his Malibu Stacy figurines, explains down the line in a very patient manner that Randy can't sanction the purchase of another player.
Brilliant...
-
so when do you think the fans will turn against Mr. Lerner? We have been very patient thus so far but I feel the groundswell of opinion is slowly turning against him.
Next home game, the one after or wait until we are relegated at the end of e season?
-
The club is a mess and blame lies with Lerner, Faulkner, lambert, and going back further Mcleish, houllier, o Neill- we are in a really poor state, spent a fortune and left with a threadbare squad of young players , and overpaid under performers , a shocking example of how so much money can be spent in 5 years to end up with such a very poor team.
-
Even if we escape relegation this year, with Randy's grip on the purse strings, does anyone really believe that it we wont be battling relegation again next year? Its been like this for 3 seasons now, I'm getting tired of it, and if you take out the MON era, its been like it since midway through Gregory's reign as manager, give or take a season.
That is the truth.
Maybe gates of 30,000ish and comparatively cheap tickets compared to clubs we'd consider a our rivals, isn't enough to compete anymore.
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
Stage 1 Kübler Ross
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
Stage 1 Kübler Ross
I have made it to stage four.
-
Jesus, I really picked the wrong month to decide to go tee total didn't I!!!
Ditto
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
Stage 1 Kübler Ross
So if you are so good at spotting denial, how come you failed to see the denial implicit in the OP?
You might equally claim that blaming Villa's predicament on bad management, is a denial of the truth that the club was never a serious contender for a top-four club.
The owner seems to have reached stage five (acceptance) as regards accepting that Villa's potential is too limited to waste any more money on.
So surely, by your own criterion, his lack of denial would be good management, wouldn't it?
-
Apart from waxing lyrical villadroid do you have any suggestion as to what should or will happen next ?
-
There's a huge difference between accepting that we aren't challenging the top 4 positions and seeing our current malaise. No matter how clever you want to sound villadroid the poor running of this club is inexorably linked to our rapid decline.
-
Apart from waxing lyrical villadroid do you have any suggestion as to what should or will happen next ?
Whether it involves relegation or not remains to be seen but Villa will emerge as a properly run business, which does not rely on debt and develops most of its own players.
I presume that Villa are now trying to set themselves up to be run more like West Brom, rather than Man City or Chelsea.
Reports on the financial set-up at the Baggies are always very favourable and the club is described as risk-averse.
So that would be my guess.
-
It doesn't help that Randy owns the club fully ,no other share holders to really answer too.
And look at the way most of us threw our shares at him when he took over! I even remember being sworn at and called a traitor on the Mailing List because I said I wasn't going to willingly sell my one share!
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
Stage 1 Kübler Ross
So if you are so good at spotting denial, how come you failed to see the denial implicit in the OP?
You might equally claim that blaming Villa's predicament on bad management, is a denial of the truth that the club was never a serious contender for a top-four club.
The owner seems to have reached stage five (acceptance) as regards accepting that Villa's potential is too limited to waste any more money on.
So surely, by your own criterion, his lack of denial would be good management, wouldn't it?
I didn't realise I was so good at spotting denial nor did I know that I should have vetted all posts prior to mine in search of other cases of denial. While I'm at it I didn't realise I'd set any criteria. I can't remember any claims either.
-
Paulie, you've summed it up I suspect. Lack of experience and lack of attention to the important things seem to characterise the current club management.
-
It doesn't help that Randy owns the club fully ,no other share holders to really answer too.
And look at the way most of us threw our shares at him when he took over! I even remember being sworn at and called a traitor on the Mailing List because I said I wasn't going to willingly sell my one share!
I've still got mine... I refused to give it up. Even got another letter the other day to say sell up. NEVER!!!!
-
It doesn't help that Randy owns the club fully ,no other share holders to really answer too.
And look at the way most of us threw our shares at him when he took over! I even remember being sworn at and called a traitor on the Mailing List because I said I wasn't going to willingly sell my one share!
I've still got mine... I refused to give it up. Even got another letter the other day to say sell up. NEVER!!!!
You've got the certificate. Randy owns the share.
-
It doesn't help that Randy owns the club fully ,no other share holders to really answer too.
And look at the way most of us threw our shares at him when he took over! I even remember being sworn at and called a traitor on the Mailing List because I said I wasn't going to willingly sell my one share!
I've still got mine... I refused to give it up. Even got another letter the other day to say sell up. NEVER!!!!
You've got the certificate. Randy owns the share.
The man will never own me.
-
The man or The Man?
-
I must thank Pauliewalnuts because until he presented the evidence that Villa is a badly run club, I actually believed that it might be true.
You don't have to think too long, when presented with the examples he offers, to conclude that Villa are not a badly run club.
Certainly not brilliant but not bad by football's standards.
Once the examples of Birmingham, Leeds and Newcastle are offered up, clubs which range from from the criminal to the ridiculous, Villa's minor failings are put into perspective.
The assumption that the only criterion of a well-run club is the avoidance of relegation at any price is seriously flawed.
For those who think entirely in terms of consuming the football product these things cannot matter, but for anyone who thinks they support a club, I am afraid they must.
So thanks Pauliewalnuts, you brought light to a gloomy night.
Stage 1 Kübler Ross
So if you are so good at spotting denial, how come you failed to see the denial implicit in the OP?
You might equally claim that blaming Villa's predicament on bad management, is a denial of the truth that the club was never a serious contender for a top-four club.
The owner seems to have reached stage five (acceptance) as regards accepting that Villa's potential is too limited to waste any more money on.
So surely, by your own criterion, his lack of denial would be good management, wouldn't it?
Villa have more potential than Man City or Chelsea to name but two so I'm not too sure Lerner has accepted Villa's potential is "too limited". I think he has simply realised he has not got the finances, nor industry expertise to get Villa competing at that level. At present Lerner is trying to run a vintage Rolls Royce on the budget of an Austin Allegro.
-
so when do you think the fans will turn against Mr. Lerner? We have been very patient thus so far but I feel the groundswell of opinion is slowly turning against him.
Next home game, the one after or wait until we are relegated at the end of e season?
This transfer window will give us the timing. If by February the club have not provided funding for new players, that everyone knows we need, the fans will turn.