Super Clubs

[pauliewalnuts]

I think the absolute final nail in the coffin would be allowing clubs to sell their own TV rights seperately, as happens in some other European countries.

[montague]

You can't say we will never win the league again. Who knows what is around the corner. 2 years ago City weren't a super club. 10 years ago Chelsea weren't. We could be in Arab or Russian ownership in a few months, you never know. If, in the meantime, the product is entertaining and exciting, we have a good go at the cups and turn over the big clubs now and then, then theres no reason to be too glum.

[andrew08]

And of course nothing has really changed in the 40 odd years I've been around. 81-82 was freaky (enjoyable though of course) as was a few years before for Forest. What makes it worse now is that we felt optimistic. Up until the moment MON (in hindsight)left. AM making these comments on the back of a week when half our nations side is made up of former players is just another twist of the knife of reality.

[Stu]

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.

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.

That's a fair point but even though prices have rocketed in the past 20 years they've not had much effect on our attendances.

I wasn't having a go at our attendances, I think they're great when looking at lack of success, recession and cost. I was just saying that if we've got to accept our lot amongst the also-rans and scratch around for domestic cups, then £40 for a ticket to a game in a league we have no chance of winning is steep. I recognise that this is the same for 17 other clubs.

[Chris Smith]

The manager told the truth and even though it is an uncomfortable message I don't think we should be critical of a man being honest.

We aren't a big club any more, we don't have enough people turning up every week to be able to claim that we are or an owner with deep enough pockets to pretend it.

I'm ok with that and with us working to a model based on developing the best young talent we can find both through our academy and targeted acquisitions.

[philthebar]

The truth often hurts

[pauliewalnuts]

You can't say we will never win the league again. Who knows what is around the corner. 2 years ago City weren't a super club. 10 years ago Chelsea weren't. We could be in Arab or Russian ownership in a few months, you never know. If, in the meantime, the product is entertaining and exciting, we have a good go at the cups and turn over the big clubs now and then, then theres no reason to be too glum.

You've just summed up exactly what i was saying.

Without insane Arab or Russian money - no chance, and oh well, we can have a pop at the cups and turn over the big clubs every now and then.

What is sad is that for clubs like us and many other formerly competitive clubs, that is all it comes to.

[JJ-AV]

Everyone said Chelsea would dominate when Abramovic came in, they signed world class players at the time too, but in 8 years they've won 3 league titles and got to 1 Champions League final.

Man City have undoubtedly made it harder, but it's not impossible.

We just need a long term strategy and to stick to it. If it's selling high and buying low then so be it, it's worked for so many clubs across Europe (Spurs, Lyon, Porto, Sevilla).

Winning the league might not be possible in the next 7 or 8 years, but top 4 certainly is. Take away the mans credentials as a manager, but In MON's last season we got 64 points.

Arsenal finished fourth with 68 last season.
Spurs got it with 70 in 2009/10
Arsenal with (as we know) 72 in 2008/09

So an average of 70. We hit 60, 62 and 64 under MON I believe.

A Modric instead of a Sidwell, a VDV instead of an Ireland, a Gallas instead of a Collins or, as we all knew at the time, a Bent instead of a Heskey would have got us even closer.

It's difficult, but any manager worth his salt should be able to get this club around the 60 point mark with some backing from the board after a couple of years. Then he's just got to get a bit of luck to take us that bit further. It's certainly doable.

[NeilH]

God how depressing has the Premiership become when our ambitions (along with the rest of the clubs) lie in the hope that some rich bloody Sheik will become along and fast track us into the Chumps League.

[Vanilla]

I think the fact that the England squad the other night, you could say had roughly £100 million worth of ex-Villa players in midfield. Players who we had to sell in their prime, says a lot. Yes you could say they didn't want to stay, so why keep them, but the fact they didn't want to stay, or the fact we couldn't encourage them to, also says something.

[pauliewalnuts]

Everyone said Chelsea would dominate when Abramovic came in, they signed world class players at the time too, but in 8 years they've won 3 league titles and got to 1 Champions League final.

So they've won the league in almost half the seasons since then?

It's hardly a record of failure, is it?

[dave.woodhall]

I wasn't having a go at our attendances, I think they're great when looking at lack of success, recession and cost. I was just saying that if we've got to accept our lot amongst the also-rans and scratch around for domestic cups, then £40 for a ticket to a game in a league we have no chance of winning is steep. I recognise that this is the same for 17 other clubs.

I wasn't criticising them either - I was saying that prices rose astronomically from 1992 onwards, but so did crowds. 

[Billy Walker]

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.

And which 'real Villa man' would you have picked?

I cna agree that the use of the term 'super club' may be a poor choice of words, but it you think back to the League Cup final against Arsenal he certainly didn't set his team out to be in awe of them.

Yep, you make a very fair point.  My dream would have been Sid taking the step up with perhaps a more experienced battler working alongside him.   

The point I'm trying to make is that we need a man who can rally the troops and lift/unite the club.  I like McLeish and I think he has some very good qualities as a manager. I just think, as others have said, that he has chosen the wrong words on this occasion.  It's a worry in the back of my mind that he just might not be bullish enough about our club and far too ready to back down to Fergie and such like.  I'm certainly backing him but when I read the superclub quotes I couldn't help but inwardly groan.

[Meanwood Villa]

That's about the top and bottom of it really. In a few years, when the Prem is utterly dominated by three uber rich teams, I'll be intrigued to see how Sky market it.

They'll market it by saying "look how great it is to see the 3 uber rich teams destroy their opponents" Not too different from now

[dave.woodhall]

That's about the top and bottom of it really. In a few years, when the Prem is utterly dominated by three uber rich teams, I'll be intrigued to see how Sky market it.

They'll market it by saying "look how great it is to see the 3 uber rich teams destroy their opponents" Not too different from now

Much of their target audience support one of the three clubs. Too many others will watch any football that's on.