Return of O'Neill - divided opinion

[pauliewalnuts]

What I've recently become curious about is how much, if any, of their spending was based on the assumption of regular sell outs at Villa Park and increased commercial activity. Is it beyond the realms of possibility that the plug was pulled as the gate receipts etc weren't as hoped for or required to continue the level of spending?

It's a possibility, but I'm not sure how much difference there would have been in income last year, say, in comparison to the previous couple of years.

That actually doesn't make sense. What I mean is if you have a ground that can hold 42,000, and you average 37,000 (say) rather than fill it every week, is that 5,000 empty seats 19 times a year enough to be the deciding factor between massive spending sprees and poking around for bosmans?

It starts to become significant when tickets are so in demand you can stick your prices up to (say) Arsenal levels.

If they thought they were ever going to get to the point where they could sell tickets at London levels, they're bonkers.

Even Man United can't do that.

[Risso]

They've hardly helped themselves though when it comes to extra income.  The Acorns deal might have been a nice thought, but I bet they wouldn't do it again if they could turn back the clock.  Also the various cocks ups over the kits won't have helped the turnover figure.

[dave.woodhall]

If they thought they were ever going to get to the point where they could sell tickets at London levels, they're bonkers.

Even Man United can't do that.

Up to Man United levels then. I just gave Arsenal as an example.

[pauliewalnuts]

I think the biggest mistake they made was last summer. OK, we had reduced crowds last season, and it was a bit of a stinker, but had they made an even half decent appointment, they could have had us see last season as a blip in an otherwise positive progression. What they've done, though, is make an appointment that has just taken last year's regression and accelerated it considerably.

I'd honestly be very worried if I were Randy. He doesn't need to worry about the angry, shouty placard mob last summer, but he does need to worry about the damage that is being done to the (sorry) "brand" so very quickly, and the fact that he's served up a huge dish of disappointment to his core customers.

I've a feeling they'll realise this over the summer in the ST renewal campaign, but with us needing almost a total squad overhaul and having to replace a big chunk of playing staff, it's really going to be a bad time for them to do something about it unless it's at the end of the season.

[Risso]

If they thought they were ever going to get to the point where they could sell tickets at London levels, they're bonkers.

Even Man United can't do that.

Up to Man United levels then. I just gave Arsenal as an example.

Even Man Utd levels is unrealistic.  They are the most successful team of the last 30 years, who have a huge nationwide following.  The best we could realistically have hoped for was to sell out 40,000 every week, then if we were successful enough, maybe get to Newcastle levels, ie around the 50K mark.  By being easily the biggest team in the area, and with no decent Midlands rival for most of the Premier League years, we should have achieved this.  Although of course that applies even more to Ellis's tenure than Lerner's.

[pauliewalnuts]

If they thought they were ever going to get to the point where they could sell tickets at London levels, they're bonkers.

Even Man United can't do that.

Up to Man United levels then. I just gave Arsenal as an example.

Honestly, I think their main issue wasn't even financial, i think it was that, bar one season where our average was as near to capacity as can be, they didn't fill the ground week in, week out.

If I were Lerner, looking back at the O'Neill years, one thing that would really disappoint me would be that despite spending all that money, we really didn't buy a single "bums on seats" player. You can say Ashley Young turned into a fine player, but he was raw when we bought him. James Milner is an excellent player, but again, not the sort who shifts tickets.

We did the spending big money thing, but we didn't do the "making impressive signings" bit - instead we spent pretty high figures on a large number of players.

You could also throw in the fact that the quality of the home football for at least half the MON reign was so deeply uninspiring, which is something you can look at the manager for, and is something again that will not shift tickets.

What makes me laugh is that sometimes you'll hear people talk about his as if it is our fault, the fans - well, we didn't show up, so he stopped bothering, it was ll our fault.

The most disappointing thing is that he gave up so quickly, and so comprehensively. If that's how quickly he bins it, how dedicated was he in the first place?

It isn't the spending curbs that say the most about his reduced dedication to the cause, it is the fact that he's never seen here any more, whereas previously, he'd show up as much as he could, and even turn up for away matches. I'm aware his son has changed school etc etc etc, but really, a billionaire will find travel much easier than you or I ...

[Risso]

I think the biggest mistake they made was last summer. OK, we had reduced crowds last season, and it was a bit of a stinker, but had they made an even half decent appointment, they could have had us see last season as a blip in an otherwise positive progression. What they've done, though, is make an appointment that has just taken last year's regression and accelerated it considerably.

The decision to appoint McLeish hasn't lost any of its ability to leave people dumbstruck even after nearly a whole season.  Really, what sort of bizarre alignment of the planets had to happen for Lerner to even give it a second's thought, let alone actually go through with it?

[dave.woodhall]

If they thought they were ever going to get to the point where they could sell tickets at London levels, they're bonkers.

Even Man United can't do that.

Up to Man United levels then. I just gave Arsenal as an example.

Even Man Utd levels is unrealistic.  They are the most successful team of the last 30 years, who have a huge nationwide following.  The best we could realistically have hoped for was to sell out 40,000 every week, then if we were successful enough, maybe get to Newcastle levels, ie around the 50K mark.  By being easily the biggest team in the area, and with no decent Midlands rival for most of the Premier League years, we should have achieved this.  Although of course that applies even more to Ellis's tenure than Lerner's.

That's what I said. They thought we could sell out the ground every match or as near as dammit, and very likely be able to raise prices as well. There was a real 'can do' attitude amongst supporters then, and the belief that we would soon be selling shirts throughout the world.   

[Risso]

I'm aware his son has changed school etc etc etc, but really, a billionaire will find travel much easier than you or I ...

You'd think he'd want to be getting value for money out of his new private jet as well.  I like the fact that he flew to Afghanistan in it though, must have thought he'd face a less hostile reception there than Cleveland or Aston.

[pauliewalnuts]

I think the biggest mistake they made was last summer. OK, we had reduced crowds last season, and it was a bit of a stinker, but had they made an even half decent appointment, they could have had us see last season as a blip in an otherwise positive progression. What they've done, though, is make an appointment that has just taken last year's regression and accelerated it considerably.

The decision to appoint McLeish hasn't lost any of its ability to leave people dumbstruck even after nearly a whole season.  Really, what sort of bizarre alignment of the planets had to happen for Lerner to even give it a second's thought, let alone actually go through with it?

I genuinely can't believe he did it, even now. Forget the football pros and cons, it was just such a dreadfully poor business decision to make on a number of levels.

[pauliewalnuts]

When i say business decision, I mean that since last summer, the business has alienated a vast sector of its customer base (not just the ones who didn't want a Blues manager, but the ones who fancied a bit of decent football, who didn't think getting relegated a fortnight before - again - was a good indicator of quality, the ones who think paying hundreds of pounds a year means you should at least be trying to win matches - you get the gist, the list goes on), has unsurprisingly diminished its standing in the league, thus reducing PL income, has tarnished its brand to the extent that we are already seeing 'Villa need a spell in the Championship' style articles, and is somewhat symbolically exactly where it was in the league when he turned up, and equally broke.

Now, we're still broke, we can't really afford to sack the manager and employ a new one, and customers are deserting the business like rats from a sinking ship.

It's honestly hard to even begin to understand what they were thinking when they made that appointment. What could they have done which would have resulted in a worse state of affairs? Who could they have appointed?

O'Neill had a lot of faults, and the way he left us was unforgiveable, but the most disappointing thing is that, having moved the club on in a number of ways when he was here, since he's gone, the club have managed to throw pretty much all of that advancement away, and it's hard not to think that we're back where we started.

[Risso]

It's honestly hard to even begin to understand what they were thinking when they made that appointment. What could they have done which would have resulted in a worse state of affairs? Who could they have appointed?

You've made the point before, and it's one I agree with, that if you wanted to damage Aston Villa as a club out of sheer spite, you'd be hard pushed to have done as good a job as Lerner in the last 12 months.

[Brian Taylor]

MoN didn't get the sack. He left of his own accord. What have we left now, player-wsie, but his 'errors' and a new manager who wants to downsize and reduce the wagebill in keeping with the Chairman's wishes. It is all shite. I want us to win against Sunderland but I do wish we were as safe as them presently!

[villadelph]

What I would do to see that bird in public.

[ktvillan]

What I've recently become curious about is how much, if any, of their spending was based on the assumption of regular sell outs at Villa Park and increased commercial activity. Is it beyond the realms of possibility that the plug was pulled as the gate receipts etc weren't as hoped for or required to continue the level of spending?

This is what I've always thought - and the general's most telling comment was his "4,000 empty seats - what more can we do?" They thought, and so did many of our fans, that a Doug-free and successful Villa would sell out every game.

We weren't entirely Doug-free, he's still haunting the place (although we could do with a bit of his deadliness at the moment).  We weren't exactly successful either, merely competent, and only exceeding what Gregory and O'Leary had managed by being more consistent at reaching 6th place. But with loads of money spent.  The "more they could do" would have been to buy some bums on seats players and play some entertaining football at VP.  If the General couldn't work that out, perhaps it's best that he's no longer involved.