There is a thesis to be written entitled The underlying problem at Aston Villa Football Club. The truth is that, aside from a glorious trajectory from the mid 70s to the early 80s (and that had its blips along the way) and the odd season here or there, the club has underperformed when measured against its potential since the 1930s. Yes, for the first time in my supporting life the club has consistently underperformed for a number of seasons on the trot, but that also happened in the late 50s and even more spectacularly in the mid/late 60s. I don't know what that history tells us, other than perhaps there is a something deeper in the collective psyche of those that own, run, play for or support the club. A lack of ruthlessness perhaps. A contentment with just being top dog in the city or wider region. An acceptance that, like it or not, just as the city is something of a national joke, then the club has to play its part in the ridicule. Possibly it is none of those things. But to lay all the blame for the current malaise at the door of Lerner or Fox or Sherwood or Agbonlahor I think misses the bigger picture.
I don't think it's time to throw in the towel just yet.September?
Can't really argue with any of those, Dave. There are also clubs in London that will fall into that category, too. Perhaps the answer is that some clubs have their moments and when it's gone, it's gone, and a few have perpetual success. A success that has become entrenched through the current financial rewards that comes with that success.
I can't blame Lerner. Is he disinterested because of personal problems, sure okay. Has he always fronted up cash and given each manager a more than healthy chunk to spend, yes I think he has. He's written off and swallowed the loans the club owes him to help it out. That's really all I can ask of a billionaire owner. He's an easy target because we all know about him and he never speaks. That's his crime apparently.For me, our CEO's should have done more. Yes perhaps they should not have been appointed but they are the ones with the day to day running of Aston Villa FC. They, either through inaction or inability have allowed Villa to be in this inescapable rut. We've also had a lot of CEOs and that can't be good for stability or for continuity. More nous on the board at Villa and we'd do better I think. We wouldn't just blindly stand by while everything seemingly goes to shit.
Quote from: Nelly on September 27, 2015, 07:54:51 PMI can't blame Lerner. Is he disinterested because of personal problems, sure okay. Has he always fronted up cash and given each manager a more than healthy chunk to spend, yes I think he has. He's written off and swallowed the loans the club owes him to help it out. That's really all I can ask of a billionaire owner. He's an easy target because we all know about him and he never speaks. That's his crime apparently.For me, our CEO's should have done more. Yes perhaps they should not have been appointed but they are the ones with the day to day running of Aston Villa FC. They, either through inaction or inability have allowed Villa to be in this inescapable rut. We've also had a lot of CEOs and that can't be good for stability or for continuity. More nous on the board at Villa and we'd do better I think. We wouldn't just blindly stand by while everything seemingly goes to shit.i posted during the close season that I felt ultimately Faulkener as CEO should shoulder a lot of the blame for not reigning in Oneills spending spree which effectively broke the club for the foreseeable future, which is where our current problems really began.
Quote from: TopDeck113 on September 27, 2015, 08:55:49 PMCan't really argue with any of those, Dave. There are also clubs in London that will fall into that category, too. Perhaps the answer is that some clubs have their moments and when it's gone, it's gone, and a few have perpetual success. A success that has become entrenched through the current financial rewards that comes with that success. I can't think of any club that has perpetual success except possibly Arsenal and even they've had periods of mediocrity. The two most widely-known English clubs are Liverpool and Manchester United. Neither of them had massive success until the fifties in the former case and sixties in the latter, and even then they both went 26/26 and counting seasons without winning the league, which given their supporter bases is massive underachievement. League-wise there can't be many club who've outperformed us since we came up in 1975 but the big problem where perception is concerned is that we've only won three domestic trophies in that time. I forget who it was that said it, but clubs such as those two and to a lesser extent Surs can always seem to spawn a trophy when they aren't doing well to keep their profile high.
Quote from: dave.woodhall on September 27, 2015, 09:11:49 PMQuote from: TopDeck113 on September 27, 2015, 08:55:49 PMCan't really argue with any of those, Dave. There are also clubs in London that will fall into that category, too. Perhaps the answer is that some clubs have their moments and when it's gone, it's gone, and a few have perpetual success. A success that has become entrenched through the current financial rewards that comes with that success. I can't think of any club that has perpetual success except possibly Arsenal and even they've had periods of mediocrity. The two most widely-known English clubs are Liverpool and Manchester United. Neither of them had massive success until the fifties in the former case and sixties in the latter, and even then they both went 26/26 and counting seasons without winning the league, which given their supporter bases is massive underachievement. League-wise there can't be many club who've outperformed us since we came up in 1975 but the big problem where perception is concerned is that we've only won three domestic trophies in that time. I forget who it was that said it, but clubs such as those two and to a lesser extent Spurs can always seem to spawn a trophy when they aren't doing well to keep their profile high. 4 trophies surely. League cups in 77, 94 and 96, League in 81?
Quote from: TopDeck113 on September 27, 2015, 08:55:49 PMCan't really argue with any of those, Dave. There are also clubs in London that will fall into that category, too. Perhaps the answer is that some clubs have their moments and when it's gone, it's gone, and a few have perpetual success. A success that has become entrenched through the current financial rewards that comes with that success. I can't think of any club that has perpetual success except possibly Arsenal and even they've had periods of mediocrity. The two most widely-known English clubs are Liverpool and Manchester United. Neither of them had massive success until the fifties in the former case and sixties in the latter, and even then they both went 26/26 and counting seasons without winning the league, which given their supporter bases is massive underachievement. League-wise there can't be many club who've outperformed us since we came up in 1975 but the big problem where perception is concerned is that we've only won three domestic trophies in that time. I forget who it was that said it, but clubs such as those two and to a lesser extent Spurs can always seem to spawn a trophy when they aren't doing well to keep their profile high.
Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.
Author
Topic: The underlying problem... (Read 29947 times)
