Given that the Mail and the E & S are both saying that McLeish will not get the Young money it appears that bringing down the wage bill was only part of the issue and that Lerner is also cutting back on what he makes available for transfers. Why?Clearly it's his money and he can do what he likes but it flies in the face of their stated ambitions and it seems that we have given up any pretence of trying to compete with the top 6.
Perhaps it's just part of a different strategy.I don't accept (yet) that he's given up the ghost. But if spending an extra £50-75 million of the Lerner family trust in one season isn't going to have a significant impact on league placings for us (securing top 4, in other words) you can understand to a degree why he might be reticent to chase big losses with even more losses. He talked about sustainable growth from the outset. It's not as if he promised Abramovich style 'whatever it takes' and then pulled back on that. When it looked like it was attainable in the short-term (2007-2010) he went as big as he could. His manager at the time didn't deliver and now we face different sporting and financial challenges in a league which has at least 10 billionaire owners and only 4 CL spots up for grabs.
Doesn't sound like it was Bannan just repeating a mirror story, it seems to me to be something that the whole squad were clued in on, and they would be a lot closer to the action than any of us.
Quote from: Chris Smith on June 27, 2011, 02:10:52 PMGiven that the Mail and the E & S are both saying that McLeish will not get the Young money it appears that bringing down the wage bill was only part of the issue and that Lerner is also cutting back on what he makes available for transfers. Why?Clearly it's his money and he can do what he likes but it flies in the face of their stated ambitions and it seems that we have given up any pretence of trying to compete with the top 6.Exactly what puzzles me.What was the point in all the massive in roads we made in the first 4 seasons, just to chuck it away now?
Quote from: Rip Van Bentfletch on June 27, 2011, 02:20:09 PMQuote from: Chris Smith on June 27, 2011, 02:10:52 PMGiven that the Mail and the E & S are both saying that McLeish will not get the Young money it appears that bringing down the wage bill was only part of the issue and that Lerner is also cutting back on what he makes available for transfers. Why?Clearly it's his money and he can do what he likes but it flies in the face of their stated ambitions and it seems that we have given up any pretence of trying to compete with the top 6.Exactly what puzzles me.What was the point in all the massive in roads we made in the first 4 seasons, just to chuck it away now?So on the basis that two local rags are saying we're not spending loads we've "given up"? The transfer window will be open for another two months. We'd be pretty stupid to spend the intervening period boasting about how much money we've got to spend, thus ensuring that every team puts their prices up.
Because every other club are stupid and will be taken in by Villa's Baldryck like cunning plan of pretending they have no money.
Quote from: Chris Smith on June 27, 2011, 05:58:32 PMBecause every other club are stupid and will be taken in by Villa's Baldryck like cunning plan of pretending they have no money. You seemingly believe it, so why shouldn't other clubs?I really don't know what to believe to be honest, it could be a smokescreen, or it could be the truth. We won't know one way or the other for a few months yet.