Doubting Randy?

[Concrete John]

I can't believe some people on here.

Randy has never moved the goalpost's.

He realised Martin was no good for Villa.
Martin paid 12 million for Downing on about 50k a week, when we had Albrighton ready.

Martin was no good for Villa long term, he never gave young lads a chance just wanted to buy old players on high wages to sit on the bench.

Houllier will use the squad and help bring on Academy players, whereas Martin would have driven them all away ie, Gary Cahill!

I used the goalposts phrase as he wanted players wages shed before spending in the summer, but now seems happy to spend on the understanding they go soon/later.  No a criticism, just an observation.

If he was no good for Villa and Randy knew this, why didn't he sack him?

And would that be the same Downing that's out top scorer this season? 

[Mazrim]

If Sidwell and Beye had played more and weren't good enough, then he shouldn't have bought them.
But using them more would have been some justification for buying them in the first place.
Also, if you're going to buy somebody who is just for cover, dont pay them £40k-£50k per week.

[pauliewalnuts]

If you have a squad of 24 players then even if you use all subs each week you are going to have 10 of them being paid without kicking a ball in anger. Even if you rotate players your still going to be left with the same number not doing anything. O'Neill's approach was fairly old school in that he thought of it as a first team and then the rest as cover for injury etc and this was his downfall, I think, but if he'd played Beye and Sidwell more often then the wage bill would have been just the same although results might have been worse.

I agree, you will have players doing nothing, the argument though is that those players not being used were sapping a huge amount of money.

The whole first XI plus cover being his downfall is something I'd agree with, and that's another argument entirely, but even if you accept that that was his approach, was it necessary to have such expensive big earners as the cover?

It will be interesting to see what happens to the squad over coming months but we're in the fortunate position of having a decent crop of youngsters to step up as we inevitably lose more experienced players as their contracts run down.

That's true. I doubt those youngsters would have got a look in under MON either, another failing of his.

[pauliewalnuts]

If Sidwell and Beye had played more and weren't good enough, then he shouldn't have bought them.
But using them more would have been some justification for buying them in the first place.
Also, if you're going to buy somebody who is just for cover, dont pay them £40k-£50k per week.

Also as someone pointed out, Mat Kendrick, I think:

2009: Collins + Dunne + Warnock = 18m
2007/8: Shorey + Knight + Davies + Cuellar = 26m

That's a somewhat scattergun approach to building a squad. Buy left back, barely use him, a year later buy another one to replace him. Buy three centre backs, a year later buy more, making it 32 or 33m on centre halves.

Then there's buying no right back for ages, playing Mellberg, NRC, Gardner, Bardsley on loan there, then buying two of them, both on big money, then opting to play neither of them there, instead sticking one of your centre halves there, whilst occasionally your actual right back makes an appearance at LB, and the other right back you bought spends his Saturday afternoons wandering around Selfridges looking for ways to spend his 40k a week.

I'm not going to say MON didn't get decent results - he did - but I find it really hard how anyone could argue there was any consistency in his transfer policy.

[WikiVilla]

How much did MON squander on Sidwell, Beye, Davies, Shorey, Salifou, Harewood : best part of £30m plus the wages - another £15m ? - £45m and what will we get back ? less than £10m - Shocking
No wonder RAL had had enough

[Villa'Zawg]

Here are some players that we hardly used last season and a ballpark figure for their wages.

Sidwell - 50k p/w
Shorey - 33k p/w
Harewood - 27k p/w
Beye - 40k p/w
Davies - 30k p/w

That's £26 million in fees and £182,000 per week in wages.

It's no wonder he was told to sort it and, let's get this right, it wasn't the wage bill per se that was the problem. They wanted a more equitable distribution of that outlay.

And all those players were available for transfer in the summer with MON's agreement as well as Luke Young and NRC. The club held meetings with their agents at the beginning of the summer to inform them of what the club wanted.

It's also worth noting that most of those players were first team choice at some point and needed to be moved on due to lack of performance or due to our having recruited better replacements.

We've seen to our cost this season what happens when you rely too heavily on inexperienced youth as injury cover.

[pauliewalnuts]

Here are some players that we hardly used last season and a ballpark figure for their wages.

Sidwell - 50k p/w
Shorey - 33k p/w
Harewood - 27k p/w
Beye - 40k p/w
Davies - 30k p/w

That's £26 million in fees and £182,000 per week in wages.

It's no wonder he was told to sort it and, let's get this right, it wasn't the wage bill per se that was the problem. They wanted a more equitable distribution of that outlay.

And all those players were available for transfer in the summer with MON's agreement as well as Luke Young and NRC. The club held meetings with their agents at the beginning of the summer to inform them of what the club wanted.

It's also worth noting that most of those players were first team choice at some point and needed to be moved on due to lack of performance or due to our having recruited better replacements.

We've seen to our cost this season what happens when you rely too heavily on inexperienced youth as injury cover.

The main problem this season has not been the kids brought in to cover injuries, it has been experienced players who have let us down.

Also, those players, how frequently and for how long were they first choices?

"Needed to be moved on for lack of performance" - ie "they were shit", so who bought them in the first place?

Or "having recruited better replacements" - so we bought Shorey, replaced him the next season. We bought Davies and Cuellar, then the next season bought two more centre halves.

It is also very well holding meetings with agents and telling them their clients could move.

What do you reckon Habib Beye's agent said? I think I can guess. He's 32/33 and with 18 months at 40k a week left to run on his contract, which expires in August 2012

That's another 3,040,000 in wages we've got to pay him yet.

[PeterWithe]

Anyone posted this from Neil Moxey in the Daily Mail?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1348577/The-Midlander-Villa-fans-doubt-64-carat-owner-Lerner--does-care.html

Aston Villa fans: Don't take 64-carat owner Randy Lerner for granted - he does care
By NEIL MOXLEY

If I owned a cap, I’d be doffing it in the direction of Aston Villa owner Randy Lerner.

'Does he still care?' they asked.

'He’s fed up with his plaything,' they claimed.

Well, yes, he does still care. And no, he is still fully committed to making Aston Villa a success.
I mean... wow! A £24million commitment in transfer fees, not to mention a contract worth in excess of £15m on the club’s record transfer signing Darren Bent.

Statement of intent: Villa fans will be delighted to see new signing Darren Bent training for the first time since his £24million arrival
While we are at it, Jean Makoun’s signing, from Lyon is another major outlay, a £5m fee and all the associated salary costs. (I understand too, that it may not be the last. Although Villa say there is no interest in Wigan Athletic left-back Maynor Figueroa, the rumour-mill is awash with suggestions that a £4m bid is in the offing.)
Whatever the outcome of the next fortnight before the window closes, the statement from Lerner could not have been more emphatic.
 
First, that we don’t want to go down. Secondly, that I back Gerard Houllier.

And really, how lucky is the Frenchman? My last Midlander column upset the hierarchy at Villa Park. I’m sorry about the fact they were brassed off, but perhaps it was a natural consequence of the drip, drip, drip of negativity over the past four months. It wasn’t written out of malice. More out of a sense of duty to supporters who clearly felt so strongly after the Sunderland game that they called for their own manager’s head. As a subjectivist, am I meant to ignore that? Furthermore, do you know what?

That last piece was read over 10,000 times on this site. I’m lucky enough to have a few twitter followers too.
And I can’t even remember one supporter who moaned that I had been out of order. Which probably makes Lerner’s actions all the more creditable. He’s stuck to his guns and backed his man.
And how. Villa lie 17th in the Barclays Premier League table and, basically, Houllier has been handed a get-out-of-jail free card. Sorry, a get-out-of-jail for £50m card. Never mind what has passed before. Rows, ostracised players, poor results, etc. Never mind the fact that I understand the chief executive, Paul Faulkner, has been acting in a calm and composed manner in trying to smooth the ruffled feathers of one or two of the disgruntled players. That’s really good, solid, management. Evidence that Faulkner is really growing into his job in a mature manner. And as for former boss Martin O’Neill, I wondered what he was thinking this week when he learnt that Lerner had reached for his chequebook again. I mean, I had a chuckle when he was linked with David Sullivan and David Gold.
I wish I had the time and inclination to lay that particular bet. Nil chance of working for that pair for any significant length of time. Not a prayer.

Anyway, I digress. Was it really only six months ago that there was a ‘we must make ends meet,’ diktat issued at the Holte pub?  You know, it reminds me of that tale - I’m sure it’s apocryphal - but one day a bloke in a spanking new Range Rover goes shopping. It’s really busy in the town centre and he can’t find anywhere to park for love nor money.
Eventually, after a 15-minute search, he spies a free car parking space. He shapes up to reverse into it. But before he can do so, an old mini roars in from nowhere and beats him to it. Triumphant, the driver of the old heap sticks his head out of the window and taunts the bloke in the Range Rover. 'That’s what you can do when you can drive,' shouts the driver who then gets out and walks ten yards away from his car to the shops. Suddenly, the man in the Range Rover slams his own car in reverse, smashes into the mini, shunting it out of the space.

He winds down his own window and says: 'That’s what you can do when you’re rich.'

I think it’s a little bit like that with O’Neill. Houllier is now receiving the backing the Irishman might well have received from Lerner had he played the game a tad cuter. But talk about backing your manager. Phew. I think it’s unprecedented, given

Cue applause: Randy Lerner proved he cares about Aston Villa with his expensive outlays this week
the amount of trouble Villa are in, if you look at the current Barclays Premier League table. I’m not going to be so hypocritical as to say now that Houllier is the best thing since sliced bread because there’s a good chance that results will improve thanks to the acquisition of a £24m forward. But it’s a fact that barring two players - the full-backs - the team that should have carried a victory back to Aston on Sunday was choc-ful of the players left behind by O’Neill.
It’s also a fact that Randy Lerner continues to show his deep-rooted affection and care for his club that he has gone to such lengths to ensure survival. Look at that snap-shot at Stamford Bridge when Ciaran Clark’s late equaliser went in and Lerner was jumping around like he was in the middle of the Holte End, even though a bit of decorum is usually called for in the directors’ box. He cares all right.

Let’s face it Villa fans, if you want a look at how not to act during the transfer window, you need only look over at St Andrew’s and have a chortle. But that’s another story.

Onwards and upwards: Villa, who held champions Chelsea twice this season, now need to push on and revive their season I fully expect a fresh air of optimism to be around Villa Park come 5.30pm on Saturday evening. Villa Park, under lights, is always atmospheric. I’ve used this pay-off line before. But, as Doug Ellis used to say when I moaned he was repeating the same message to the fans over and again: ‘Neil, you need to remind people every three months of the obvious, or else they will take it for granted.’  If Villa Park can’t find it within itself to cheer Houllier - then they can prevent themselves from charges (like me) of hypocrisy by backing someone else, because he really deserves the thanks.
So step forward Randy Lerner - the sixty-four carat owner.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1348577/The-Midlander-Villa-fans-doubt-64-carat-owner-Lerner--does-care.html#ixzz1BUoVom9R

[Rip Van We Go Again]

Also, if you're going to buy somebody who is just for cover, dont pay them £40k-£50k per week.

Spot on.
But we can't lay all the blame at the door of the Villa hating madman.
Randy and the board most take equal blame i'm afraid.

[Chris Smith]

Also, if you're going to buy somebody who is just for cover, dont pay them £40k-£50k per week.

Spot on.
But we can't lay all the blame at the door of the Villa hating madman.
Randy and the board most take equal blame i'm afraid.

Problem is you are competing with teams who have players on that and more sitting on the bench. I accept that we might not be able to afford it but in that case we have to accept that our ambitions might also have to be trimmed.

[Rip Van We Go Again]

Also, if you're going to buy somebody who is just for cover, dont pay them £40k-£50k per week.

Spot on.
But we can't lay all the blame at the door of the Villa hating madman.
Randy and the board most take equal blame i'm afraid.

Problem is you are competing with teams who have players on that and more sitting on the bench. I accept that we might not be able to afford it but in that case we have to accept that our ambitions might also have to be trimmed.

I agree with you Chris, but the Beye signing is beyond the pale.
You don't shell out nearly £10m for a bloke of his age, who O'Neill almost certainly wanted as back up only.

[ExclDawg]

It probably goes beyond that as well ... O'Neil kept trotting out the same 11, game after game.  And while they were crawling off the pitch in exhaustion around Feb/March, MON refused to use his "cover" guys earning 150k in weekly wages.  At least the teams we're competing with will occasionally swap in some of the spare parts to take the load off of the main guys.

MON insisted on paying out the yang for guys to sit on the bench, while driving the starting 11 into the ground.  So you have one group of guys getting paid top coin to sit and another group getting paid well to be exhausted and inefficient.

[AV82EC]

It probably goes beyond that as well ... O'Neil kept trotting out the same 11, game after game.  And while they were crawling off the pitch in exhaustion around Feb/March, MON refused to use his "cover" guys earning 150k in weekly wages.  At least the teams we're competing with will occasionally swap in some of the spare parts to take the load off of the main guys.

MON insisted on paying out the yang for guys to sit on the bench, while driving the starting 11 into the ground.  So you have one group of guys getting paid top coin to sit and another group getting paid well to be exhausted and inefficient.

Exactly.

[Chris Smith]

It probably goes beyond that as well ... O'Neil kept trotting out the same 11, game after game.  And while they were crawling off the pitch in exhaustion around Feb/March, MON refused to use his "cover" guys earning 150k in weekly wages.  At least the teams we're competing with will occasionally swap in some of the spare parts to take the load off of the main guys.

MON insisted on paying out the yang for guys to sit on the bench, while driving the starting 11 into the ground.  So you have one group of guys getting paid top coin to sit and another group getting paid well to be exhausted and inefficient.

He played what he considered his best team, as I said it's old school where the rest were cover for injuries or suspensions. The whole knackered in March/
April thing has been massively over played in my opinion, look back to the results last year. It might be old fashioned but it is his way of working and as the manager he has to be allowed to do things his way. Just as Houlier now should have the same opportunity.

[Shrek]

I can't believe some people on here.

Randy has never moved the goalpost's.

He realised Martin was no good for Villa.
Martin paid 12 million for Downing on about 50k a week, when we had Albrighton ready.

Martin was no good for Villa long term, he never gave young lads a chance just wanted to buy old players on high wages to sit on the bench.

Houllier will use the squad and help bring on Academy players, whereas Martin would have driven them all away ie, Gary Cahill!

I used the goalposts phrase as he wanted players wages shed before spending in the summer, but now seems happy to spend on the understanding they go soon/later.  No a criticism, just an observation.

If he was no good for Villa and Randy knew this, why didn't he sack him?

And would that be the same Downing that's out top scorer this season? 

My point is Randy should have sacked him.

I think we all agree we didnt need a crocked Downing, Albrighton was ready, we should have bought Bent then.

If Martin was still here Bannan,  Albrighton, Clark, Wieman, Gardner and mabe Del boy would probably not signed/been offered a contract.

Randy hasnt moved the goalpost's, because i think its fairly obvious Carew, Davies, Warnock will be sold or loaned out, plus sidwell has gone. So we have just moved quickly and got players first unlike Martin who would wait till the last day.

What ever anybody's opinion, the facts are Randy still loves Villa and is ensuring we have a solid future.

He could quite easily have done a Middlesborough or too a lesser extent Chelsea and let all the experienced players on high wages go without replacing them, but he hasnt he has backed Gerrard and i think we all agree the players he has bought make MOST of Martin's look lazy and one-dimentional.