Randy Lerner

[andyh]

Right, understood.
But in reply to the original question, we will have paid off Sherwood, Fox and cronies, regardless of when it gets reported.

Whatever that final number, I'm sure it's a bloody lot of money and a couple of 'top drawer' players.

[Risso]

Personally I don't think Fox will be due very much.  I can't see why he'd be on a fixed conracts rather than just being on a normal contract of employment so wouldn't be entitled to anything beyond his normal notice period.  You're right, Sherwood will be on top of that, and probably Garde if/when he leaves.

That's 10% of the £300m investment though.

[fbriai]

I'm not sure where to put this, but here looks as good a place as any: out of interest, does anyone know how much money we have paid out on severance packages since Lerner took charge?

Yep

O'Neill and chums - £12m
Houllier - £6m
McLeish - £2.2m
Player contract buy outs - £6m
Lambert - £3.3m

Total - £29.5m.  Bargain.

Cheers, Risso. That's a lot of money!

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

[CJ]

And we've got Tactic Tim's pay-off to add to that lot. Surprised Houllier cost so much - would insurance have covered some of the costs due to health reasons?

[Pat McMahon]

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

One thing Chelsea have done well when sacking managers mid-season is appoint replacements on short term contracts till the end of the season and buy time to appoint a permanent manager. Exactly what we should have done with Sherwood.

[DaveD]

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

One thing Chelsea have done well when sacking managers mid-season is appoint replacements on short term contracts till the end of the season and buy time to appoint a permanent manager. Exactly what we should have done with Sherwood.

That's a very good point, that would have been ideal. I'm not sure Sherwood would have gone for it though.

[fbriai]

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

One thing Chelsea have done well when sacking managers mid-season is appoint replacements on short term contracts till the end of the season and buy time to appoint a permanent manager. Exactly what we should have done with Sherwood.

That's a very good point, that would have been ideal. I'm not sure Sherwood would have gone for it though.

Yeah, it is. Makes me wonder if we aren't bottom of this particular league then, too.

And I agree. I don't think Sherwood would have gone for it either.

[Dave]

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

One thing Chelsea have done well when sacking managers mid-season is appoint replacements on short term contracts till the end of the season and buy time to appoint a permanent manager. Exactly what we should have done with Sherwood.

But they have then paid those permanent managers enormous amounts of money. The Independent has the total figure (not including Mourinho's second sacking) as £71m in total compensation since Ranieri left in 2004.

[dave.woodhall]

Take over at Chelsea in February and there's a good chance you'll win a trophy. At Villa you might finish nineteenth.

[Pat McMahon]

Do you think it likely that we are probably second only to Chelsea in terms of the amount of money we've paid out in termination payments over the last ten years?

One thing Chelsea have done well when sacking managers mid-season is appoint replacements on short term contracts till the end of the season and buy time to appoint a permanent manager. Exactly what we should have done with Sherwood.

That's a very good point, that would have been ideal. I'm not sure Sherwood would have gone for it though.

Yeah, it is. Makes me wonder if we aren't bottom of this particular league then, too.

And I agree. I don't think Sherwood would have gone for it either.

You may well be right. But I would have offered him a contract till the end of the season with a £1m bonus for keeping us up. I reckon he would have accepted that.

[Pat McMahon]

Take over at Chelsea in February and there's a good chance you'll win a trophy. At Villa you might finish nineteenth.

Or 17th in  the case of Sherwood. I am not at all advocating on his behalf by the way, I  thought the shortlist of one was very weird, bordering on the yampy.

[DeKuip]

Whilst I can't argue that Randy doesn't deserve the stick he's getting, my biggest worry right now is that he's pushed to sell up to the first offer he gets.

The general feeling on here seems to be that we're making the right moves off the park at long last, with the knowledge and experience we now have in the boardroom - so it would be crying shame if a new owner came in and discarded all that. Randy's biggest problem hasn't been lack of spending, it's been how much he's wasted through poor decisions. IF he now has the right people making these decisions for him, isn't it better that he stays? 

What am saying is I fear us ending up the hands of the type of people who have have bought into some of those clubs that have gone down in previous seasons. Look at Forest, Wednesday and in particular Leeds who now have a madman with an axe in charge.

Maybe an absent owner, allowing experienced football people to get on with the task in hand, is the best option for us for the next few years at least.

[LTA]

Whilst I can't argue that Randy doesn't deserve the stick he's getting, my biggest worry right now is that he's pushed to sell up to the first offer he gets.

The general feeling on here seems to be that we're making the right moves off the park at long last, with the knowledge and experience we now have in the boardroom - so it would be crying shame if a new owner came in and discarded all that. Randy's biggest problem hasn't been lack of spending, it's been how much he's wasted through poor decisions. IF he now has the right people making these decisions for him, isn't it better that he stays? 

What am saying is I fear us ending up the hands of the type of people who have have bought into some of those clubs that have gone down in previous seasons. Look at Forest, Wednesday and in particular Leeds who now have a madman with an axe in charge.

Maybe an absent owner, allowing experienced football people to get on with the task in hand, is the best option for us for the next few years at least.

Getting the manager right is absolutely crucial and arguably the most important since 1987.

I know some of you felt my criticism of Garde was OTT, but the fact is he was the wrong man at the wrong time.  We need a manager who knows the league and can deal with problem players. Garde might have been able to punish the likes of Grealish, but the seniors just ignored him and he clearly couldn't stand up to them.

Managers need to be able to dominate players, not the other way round.

As for the board appointments, I'm sceptical about Bernstein in particular.  He's talking about proper planning and looking at where we've gone wrong.  We don't need that.  We all know where the club has gone wrong.  Then there's this business of saying Lerner is a fantastic owner.  Erm.  No David.  He clearly is NOT.

[Chinchilla Bathhouse]

As for the board appointments, I'm sceptical about Bernstein in particular.  He's talking about proper planning and looking at where we've gone wrong.  We don't need that.  We all know where the club has gone wrong.

We do need that, LTA.  That's exactly what we need. We might think we know where the club has gone wrong (actually we didn't know the half of it, it seems), but as you've probably noticed there's bugger all we can do about it from our armchairs.  For the first time in years someone in a position of authority at the club is delving into every nook to find out exactly what's gone wrong.  It's the only way anyone can start to fix things.  I can't believe you don't think that's needed, or that you would be remotely sceptical about a highly respected man like Bernstein on the basis that he's talking about "proper planning". That's just plain daft.         

[ciggiesnbeer]

I know some of you felt my criticism of Garde was OTT, but the fact is he was the wrong man at the wrong time.  We need a manager who knows the league and can deal with problem players.

Not picking an argument here but I am genuinely curious, why is this a criteria?

Pep Gardiola for example certainly does not know this league but I think most most people regard his appointment as a good bit of business.

Surely we just want a good manager no? Regardless of where he comes from.