GENTLEMAN

You don't have to be cynical just look at the last 3 years and the facts. Compared to other teams we are not massively improved in commercial revenue.

 

I said since Lerner had taken over the club in 2006, and there has been obvious and substantial improvements in regards to the commercial and marketing side (I provided some examples/proof). But it is easy to compare with a different club and make an unfair argument to support a bitter perspective. 

I have experienced the last three years but I am trying to be reasonable about Lerner. Why do you feel so threatened by Randy Lerner's ownership?

If the focus was ambition over cost cutting then Lambert would have been able to bring in more of his top targets

 

The focus is sustainable ambition which I feel we are trying to attempt under Lambert. If you are not excited by younger players with great potential and building a team for the future, then what are you excited by?

 

It is ambitious

In what why is cutting the wage bill massively while fighting relegation ambitious? Amazing attitude towards this owner. It really is.

I think you will find commercial income has increased under Lerner significantly

Is this not because money in general has increased as times gone on? Because compared to other teams we've certainly not improved much if any in terms of this. So everything you've mentioned is nothing to really shout about.

 

We should all be cynical like you I suppose?

You can't accuse Lerner of giving up? Why not?

You can accuse him of not investing more money into the squad or trimming the wage bill down but that does not equate to "giving up".  My definition of "giving up" would be allowing the club to collapse in on itself like the stewards at Leeds and Portsmouth ultimately did with their respective clubs. Unlike the people running those two clubs (at that time), Lerner is actively trying to rectify mistakes he has made and offer a creditable solution to move the club forward. If he had truly given up you would be a lot more bitter than you are now, trust me.

That's not true, the players we are now trying to shift on big money are those signed after Mon left when supposedly Lerner had learned his lesson. Actually though it was another 2 years of the same before he brought Lambert in.

It is not wrong though. We have not had a manager for longer than one season since Martin O'Neill (the unsustainable era). Did you miss the massive sales of Stuart Downing, James Milner, Ashley Young? And there are other high earners that left during that period too. We were operating under a sell to buy policy, we just had more assets to sale at the particular time. RL has been cutting the wage bill since MON left I am afraid.

The constant changing of managers brought more upheaval and instability. The majority of signings GH and AM made were intended to be key players and therefore commanded a bigger fee and wage. Lambert has chosen to spread his transfer budget on a bigger and younger group of players for the long term.

Our revamp has been to drop the wage bill while surviving. Why do you say this like clubs wouldn't allow it? The point of it was to bring the wage bill down. Of course Lerner is going to do that. Do you really think the likes of sylla, Westwood, lowton, Bennet and Bowery are on competitive premiership wages?

 

 

A cynical person would believe it was entirely down to cutting the wage bill, I strongly disagree (see above for the reason). Lambert would not have taken on the challenge if he had that mentality. 

There is not another club, I can think of, that would allow a manager to overhaul the squad to this extent. It is ambitious and exciting but also sustainable. Put it this way, it did not discourage Lambert from taking the job, if anything it probably appealed to him more. It takes a lot of courage to do what Lambert has done.

I have no knowledge of individual players' wages. But I would choose the players you have mentioned over Stephen Warnock and Richard Dunne. 

How so? Have we improved in comparison to other clubs? 

 

How so? I think you will find commercial income has increased under Lerner significantly. Since 2006 we have had seen record sponsorship deals and partnership with global brands (Nike/Turkish Airlines/EA Sports for example); content from AVTV has recently been added to American TV networks to enhance Villa's profile globally; the club recorded impressive shirt sales during the summer; and there has been various community programs/incentives and successful social media campaigns to raise the club's profile locally and globally. The club is marketed a lot more effectively than it ever has been and the club deserve some credit for that. 

I am comparing it with Ellis's tenure, it has improved without a shadow of doubt since Lerner took over. If you wish to research the commercial side further to compare with other clubs, feel free. 

Whilst I like HH - he isn't going to come on here and say any different about his relationship with RL / PF

Lambert has spoken about having a healthy relationship with the board on numerous occasions. Why would HH back this up if there was no truth to it? There has only been one manager that has fallen out with the board during Lerner's tenure, and even then that man advised PL to take the job. I think this myth about Lerner being difficult to work with needs to stop for now, it is cynical and malicious.

Would Lambert like more funding? Yes. Ask that question to all the managers outside the top four and you will get the same response no doubt. I imagine any advantage is welcome in an extremely competitive and insecure job.

Basically we are providing a level of finance for our manager - way, way below what a club on average of 36k gates, and 20 years premiership funding should have. We seem to spend a lot of time rustling up some player on a big salary, who isn't currently in the first team as justification for this - when in fact most clubs have a big earner who isn't currently cutting it.

You do know Lerner invested a significant amount of money initially with the target of securing Champions League revenue to sustain it. Unfortunately we never did. And, as a result, there needed to be changes in how we operated as a business or we would face a similar fate to Leeds United or Portsmouth. You have a right to challenge RL for originally running the club in a risky manner, I respect that. But you cannot accused the Lerner of giving up or having no interest in the club. I do not buy into that.

We are still dealing with the consequences of that unsustainable era, it is not hard to understand why Lerner is not investing huge amounts into transfers (currently). Maybe, and hopefully, that will change in the future. I would love it if we we could acquire better quality.

However, I still believe Lambert has been provided with decent financial backing. Managers in the Premiership rarely get the autonomy to build an entirely new squad in their own right. What other Premiership club would allow a massive revamp such as this? I am sure Leeds United or Portsmouth would have loved a chance at redemption. 

I am glad you agree that high earners who do not contribute are prevalent at the majority of clubs. It is an epidemic problem rather than just an Aston Villa issue.     

The staduim is looking the tattiest it has for many years, and the recent sponsorship deals are the smallest in recent years, 2 of the 3 recent managerial appointments have decended into farce, and the club has blown considerable amounts on compensation payments to former staff

The opinion on the stadium is from your own personal experience and standpoint, it is a weak reason to criticise the board. I could never influence your thinking over a personal experience.

Could you clarify the sponsorship deals? I am not sure if you mean length wise or financially. There could be various reasons regarding the sponsorship deals. Commercially the club has greatly improved since the Lerner takeover, and is still making strides despite the bad performances/results of the last three years. I actually feel PF deserves some credit for the improvements in that respect.

I strongly agree about the managerial errors. It did not help that MON decided to leave abruptly. The biggest problem was that there was no consistent line of thinking with the appointments and this consequently caused needless problems and lost the club significant money; Gerard Houllier had a respectable pedigree but there was huge doubts before his appointment over his health and personality; the Alex McLeish appointment was senseless and indefensible, it still has no credibility when I think about it. But it would be hard to deny the club did not make the correct decision by sacking both men and eventually appointing Lambert. There has been some progression in that area.

I believe the board has made the right decision regarding Lambert and a long term project. We need(ed) stability after the last few years, and this provides us with a genuine chance of getting back to upper echelons of the table and competing for trophies again, albeit a lot slower. I will be more than happy to see or hear an alternative plan to the one we have now.

 

Show me another club that would allow a manager to revamp the entire playing and non-playing staff? That indicates to me the club supports the manager long term.

With the aim to survive on the cheap its not really a surprise that this took place.

 

How would you have handled the situation?

 But Lambert is serving up football every bit as bad as McLeish's, and the results last season arguably were even worse.  Yet one is being kept due to the board's "patience" and the other wasn't.

 

I think they want stability under Lambert rather than just being "patient" for the sake of it. There is no creditable reason to sack Lambert as results are better than last season (so far).

One man's "allows the manager to revamp the entire playing staff" is another man's "tell the manager to get shut of the high earners and replace them with lower league dross". 

It is probably somewhere in between and less extreme. But I do believe it is for the right reasons and for the betterment of the club.

 

 

I'd have thought that credit card call-centre manager and CEO of a football club are vastly different personally.

Ignoring the fact Faulkner was promoted to CEO and had prior experience of the club's operations as COO.

 

 

The point remains, still two hugely different jobs.  The way I see it is that when Lerner started, he got some decent sporting people in, but probably didn't like taking advice from them, so got his yes-man mates in Krulak and Faulkner in instead.  All of which has led to where we are now.

 

They have made errors but that is an unfair assessment built on cynicism IMO. 

In the long term I beleive you can. The owner and CEO are key these days - they hire and fire the manager - and provide the environment for a manager to thrive. I like Lambert but the environment to thrive isn't in place - Lerner and his sidekick are responsible for that (All IMO of course).

 

I strongly disagree about the environment, I think they is a lot of scope for long term success at the club. Show me another club that would allow a manager to revamp the entire playing and non-playing staff? That indicates to me the club supports the manager long term.

According to HH Lambert has a healthy relationship with PF and RL. I think people are hoping for a fall out between the board and manager to prove something.

I am interested to know what area you believe Faulkner has failed the club? 

I'd have thought that credit card call-centre manager and CEO of a football club are vastly different personally.

Ignoring the fact Faulkner was promoted to CEO and had prior experience of the club's operations as COO.

Faulkner is a very poor, reactionary CEO - Even Graham Taylor described him as one of the "most niave men in football" - Look at the position he held before ? it wasn't even football or sport related - He was a middle manager in a 'credit card company' - The only defence you could make of him is that Randy takes the big decisions. Faulkner is just content to tick over, securing ever smaller sponsorship deals, let the staduim decay, - and thats before we have even touched on the playing side.  His 'Remit' is the well being of the club - on that his record is pretty much indefensible, A club which gets crowds of 36,000, yet can only provide nominal funds for transfers, for the last 3 seasons has languished near the foot of the table - How anyone can seriously defend him is beyond me.

It is the same Graham Taylor that was touting Steve McClaren for the Aston Villa job? Graham knows a lot about naivety, and I think that quote smacks of jealousy and bitterness to be honest. Graham Taylor has never made any mistakes in his career I suppose. 

What about Faulkner's previous job? He is employed in a business capacity at Aston Villa. The club operates as a business does it not? PF's current job and his previous are not totally dissimilar I would imagine.  How do you know Faulkner is "just content to tick over"?

Faulkner, along with Lerner, have made mistakes but you cannot make them solely responsible for the playing side. That is ridiculous and unfair.

And if they're that patient, why did they bin McLeish after a year?

Did you want McLeish to stay for longer? It was an obvious decision to sack AM, we had regressed during that season and the fan unrest was great. Alex McLeish should have gone a lot sooner IMO.

How long do they get? I would imagine the length of their contract.

 

The infatuation with Southampton makes me laugh. Who will be the next flavour of the month?

Crystal Palace on Boxing Day - be ready for that.

 

We will see.

For those calling for Lamberts head, I can see you being happy next summer, but I can see him leaving on his terms. Villa must be an incredibly frustrating job and I can see him walking unless Lerner starts showing an interest. If he can have us finish mid table with a run in the FA Cup - say 5th Rd or QF then he's achieved and his CV will be progressive still. The longer he stays the more he runs the risk of the project ending in disappointing remission . It's a balancing act for Paul Lambert.

Why do you want Lambert to leave at the earliest opportunity? To blame Lerner for something? Lambert is aware this is a long term project, and I also doubt he will get a similar job opportunity IF he did walk out on this club after finishing mid table and average run in the FA Cup.

I think the standard answer to this one is "it's not my job to search for a new manager"

 

Mostly these people are recommending sacking Lambert, ludicrous and unlikely as that is, without any clue about who might do a better job

 

I do not believe people are that serious about sacking Lambert. It is a little bit of fun by one or two posters.

Tony Pulis, only for the huge increase in the standard of football.....

...We are not even that good from corners or throw-ins  . Maybe TP can improve on that.

He'd taken us as far as he could. We would've had a year of two of finishing 8th or 9th under him if he'd stayed on I'm sure.

 

If he'd resigned the morning after the Blackburn game he'd have got a hero's reception the next time he'd returned.

 

And yep many times I looked at him managing Sunderland and you could see deep down he knew his last chance of the premier league big time was with us, not them.

IMO MON would have been in contention for the United job if he had stayed here a little bit longer. There is not a huge difference between David Moyes and Martin O'Neill.

 

 

More of a case that they have some great youngsters but at the same time have invested in quality players because they have an ambitious chairman

 

We would probably be in their position if Lerner was willing to loosen the purse strings a little and sanction a few 7 million pound signings to areas of the team that desperately need it such as AM.

 

 

They have been building for the last three or four years, but most people neglect to mention that fact or recognise the initial groundwork they had to undertake to reach this level. I find it laughable that people think it is a seamless transition.

 

We are still laying the foundations for our future. I am confident in a year or two we will be spending more money on individual players and have youth products supplementing the squad/team.

 

 

 

Lett's hope we follow suit and ditch Lambert then.

 

How about allow Lambert to have a chance to amend the style with a better quality of player.

i suppose we can ignore the record defeats, the losses to div 4 teams, the abysmal performances, the terrible lack of defence we had, the turgid football we have seen this year etc etc etc 

Its all been blown put of proportion those damning facts 

 

There is a few inconsistencies and contradictions with what you have wrote above. Are you intentionally trying to demonstrate the exaggeration on Villa Talk? 

MON did damage us and himself by leaving the club in that fashion. I would not be surprised if MON had a lot of regrets about his departure from Aston Villa.

More of a case that they have some great youngsters but at the same time have invested in quality players because they have an ambitious chairman

 

We would probably be in their position if Lerner was willing to loosen the purse strings a little and sanction a few 7 million pound signings to areas of the team that desperately need it such as AM.

 

 

They have been building for the last three or four years, but most people neglect to mention that fact or recognise the initial groundwork they had to undertake to reach this level. I find it laughable that people think it is a seamless transition.

We are still laying the foundations for our future. I am confident in a year or two we will be spending more money on individual players and have youth products supplementing the squad/team.

The infatuation with Southampton makes me laugh. Who will be the next flavour of the month?

 I think this issue over the playing style is being blown way out of proportion

 

Precisely. I could understand if we were on a massive losing streak and rooted to the foot of the table. 

Let me tell you Lambert is far from a happy bunny at Villa. If you think he is at Villa for the long haul you are very much mistaken. Its 50/50 whether he starts next season.

Rubbish. Why is Lambert "far from happy"?

I want something substantive if you are going to make claims like this. There is also nothing to suggest he is not at Villa for the long haul, all the evidence points to a long term project the club have undertaken with PL in charge. "Its 50/50 whether he starts next season" -  You could say that about nearly all the managers currently employed. Just because you would like this to happen does not mean it will happen.