Randy Lerner

[Ian.]

The general thrust of that article is correct, but it totally neglects the fact Lerner invested huge amounts to start with.

Don't get me wrong, his piss poor leadership combined with five years of under investment are the two major reasons we are getting relegated, but to act as if he didn't have a free-spending spell at all is to ignore the evidence.

As a slight aside, I also don't get the point in throwing in the sales of Delph and Benteke as examples of moving players on and pocketing the cash - both those players had release clauses, what on earth are we meant to do about that?

Benteke's was for £32m which is a gigantic sum of money, and Delph's was £8m - the amount we paid for him, which was clearly a "make sure you get something for me" figure.

I agree with the overall gist of your post, but it did seem (from the outside looking in, admittedly) that we were negligent in allowing Delph's contract to run as far as it did before renewing it. The (apparent) enthusiasm with which he signed it certainly suggested that we could have done a deal (and probably not had to include such a pitiful release clause) much, much sooner had we pulled our finger out.

I don't disagree about Delph but that article specifically focused on us selling him as a sign of our determination to flog our best players. They'd be saying the same (wrongly) if his release clause had been 30m.

I believe if Benteke and Delph wanted to stay they would have rewarded with better contracts too. No way was they pushed out the door.

There is so many things wrong at the club but the Press and the pundits get it so wrong too.

[old man villa fan]

You could draw up lists of the good things that Lerner has done and the poor decisions he has made.  The balance would fall probably 2:1 on the side of poor decisions but the list of positives could probably still run to a dozen significant items.  Lerner has generally backed new managers in the transfer market until this summer.  Some of his poor decisions have been due to him wanting to do the right thing, particularly in the early to mid-term of his time here.

Reports like this one in the Daily Star, like many others, lacks credibility as there is no depth to it and just attention seeking.  I think if one of the serious newspapers was to do a full analysis of Lerner's time at the club, I do believe that the club and Lerner would come out of it in a better light.  This selective quoting of facts (some correct, others not) is so frustrating for the supporters.

There is no doubt in my mind that his wanting to get out has been the most damaging to us.

[kippaxvilla2]

The general thrust of that article is correct, but it totally neglects the fact Lerner invested huge amounts to start with.

Don't get me wrong, his piss poor leadership combined with five years of under investment are the two major reasons we are getting relegated, but to act as if he didn't have a free-spending spell at all is to ignore the evidence.

As a slight aside, I also don't get the point in throwing in the sales of Delph and Benteke as examples of moving players on and pocketing the cash - both those players had release clauses, what on earth are we meant to do about that?

Benteke's was for £32m which is a gigantic sum of money, and Delph's was £8m - the amount we paid for him, which was clearly a "make sure you get something for me" figure.

I agree with the overall gist of your post, but it did seem (from the outside looking in, admittedly) that we were negligent in allowing Delph's contract to run as far as it did before renewing it. The (apparent) enthusiasm with which he signed it certainly suggested that we could have done a deal (and probably not had to include such a pitiful release clause) much, much sooner had we pulled our finger out.

I don't disagree about Delph but that article specifically focused on us selling him as a sign of our determination to flog our best players. They'd be saying the same (wrongly) if his release clause had been 30m.

I believe if Benteke and Delph wanted to stay they would have rewarded with better contracts too. No way was they pushed out the door.

There is so many things wrong at the club but the Press and the pundits get it so wrong too.

I'm sure I read somewhere that we wanted to sell Delph.

[Dave]

The general thrust of that article is correct, but it totally neglects the fact Lerner invested huge amounts to start with.

Don't get me wrong, his piss poor leadership combined with five years of under investment are the two major reasons we are getting relegated, but to act as if he didn't have a free-spending spell at all is to ignore the evidence.

As a slight aside, I also don't get the point in throwing in the sales of Delph and Benteke as examples of moving players on and pocketing the cash - both those players had release clauses, what on earth are we meant to do about that?

Benteke's was for £32m which is a gigantic sum of money, and Delph's was £8m - the amount we paid for him, which was clearly a "make sure you get something for me" figure.

I agree with the overall gist of your post, but it did seem (from the outside looking in, admittedly) that we were negligent in allowing Delph's contract to run as far as it did before renewing it. The (apparent) enthusiasm with which he signed it certainly suggested that we could have done a deal (and probably not had to include such a pitiful release clause) much, much sooner had we pulled our finger out.

I don't disagree about Delph but that article specifically focused on us selling him as a sign of our determination to flog our best players. They'd be saying the same (wrongly) if his release clause had been 30m.

I believe if Benteke and Delph wanted to stay they would have rewarded with better contracts too. No way was they pushed out the door.

There is so many things wrong at the club but the Press and the pundits get it so wrong too.

I'm sure I read somewhere that we wanted to sell Delph.

Why would we have wanted to do that?

[Ian.]

The general thrust of that article is correct, but it totally neglects the fact Lerner invested huge amounts to start with.

Don't get me wrong, his piss poor leadership combined with five years of under investment are the two major reasons we are getting relegated, but to act as if he didn't have a free-spending spell at all is to ignore the evidence.

As a slight aside, I also don't get the point in throwing in the sales of Delph and Benteke as examples of moving players on and pocketing the cash - both those players had release clauses, what on earth are we meant to do about that?

Benteke's was for £32m which is a gigantic sum of money, and Delph's was £8m - the amount we paid for him, which was clearly a "make sure you get something for me" figure.

I agree with the overall gist of your post, but it did seem (from the outside looking in, admittedly) that we were negligent in allowing Delph's contract to run as far as it did before renewing it. The (apparent) enthusiasm with which he signed it certainly suggested that we could have done a deal (and probably not had to include such a pitiful release clause) much, much sooner had we pulled our finger out.

I don't disagree about Delph but that article specifically focused on us selling him as a sign of our determination to flog our best players. They'd be saying the same (wrongly) if his release clause had been 30m.

I believe if Benteke and Delph wanted to stay they would have rewarded with better contracts too. No way was they pushed out the door.

There is so many things wrong at the club but the Press and the pundits get it so wrong too.

I'm sure I read somewhere that we wanted to sell Delph.

The Mirror, Sun, Star or Mail by any chance?

[ciggiesnbeer]

I have been throwing mud at Lerner & Fox the past few weeks and assuming they keep on with the lack of signings I shall continue, but no way did they want to sell Delph.

They messed up his new contract for sure, but want to sell him last summer? Nah.

[themossman]

To be honest we could have lost delph and recovered anyway. He doesn't belong on a list with Milner, young and benteke.

[rob_bridge]

To be honest we could have lost delph and recovered anyway. He doesn't belong on a list with Milner, young and benteke.

Nowhere near as good.

[pbavfckuwait]

Hind sight is a great tool, so when his time is reviewed people will look at it and have many different opinions as to when it went tits up and to the degree of Lerner's responsibility.

I will never think he deliberately set out to damage and tarnish Aston Villa, what he is, is a person who has made numerous, in fact far to many business decisions incorrectly from day one and one concern is some of those decisions have been repeated time and time again. I do not know if it is just me, but I cannot get my head around how contracts are approached at Villa Park, whilst understanding the power of those contracts are determined by the Agent and the player to a big extent, but Beye, Given, Lambert, Gabby to name just a few seem to be a consistent practice of bad business management continually occurring and have occurred whether he was splashing or tightening the cash flow.

[old man villa fan]

We seem to have had numerous players and Lambert that have signed new contracts, which may or may not been right at the time, that have delivered less in performance than before the new contract. In a way, this has been mirrored by players coming in and steadily getting worse.

[kippaxvilla2]

Pellegrini on Delph

“No, I hope he will not receive that [a bad reception]. He played a lot of years for Aston Villa and Aston Villa wanted to sell him also.

“He continued being a player that gave a lot of his career to Aston Villa and I don’t think the fans will forget all those things.”


Read more at http://www.myoldmansaid.com/villa-wanted-sell-fabian-delph-says-pellegrini-new-garde-era/#6aRG73xyJtfPxMlV.99

[kippaxvilla2]

double post

[Billy Walker]

I read the other day that in the three years since Randy Lerner sold the Browns the value of that franchise has increased by 500 million dollars.  I highlight this to ask how on earth does his mind work as a businessman?

[ChicagoLion]

I read the other day that in the three years since Randy Lerner sold the Browns the value of that franchise has increased by 500 million dollars.  I highlight this to ask how on earth does his mind work as a businessman?

He is not a Business man, he inherited a fortune.

[curiousorange]

I used to take mean pleasure in the Noses' plight when they had Lee Clark in charge - no money, shit players and heading for oblivion. But in a lot of ways we're headed the same way. There's no difference between a club with no money and a club whose owner won't spend anything. Only the fact we're Aston Villa makes me feel better.