Wishin'nhopin

Ffs – Tom Fox spent 4+ years at Arsenal before he came to us – I think he picked up some sort of football knowledge there and made a pretty good job of what he was asked to do – prior to that he worked at senior management level with NBA Asia, Gatorade and PepsiCo. What sort of credentials would you look for in a CEO? I feel far more confident with him involved in making appointment decisions than when it was Lerner and Faulkner. Who would you have gone for as manager who was either available, or likely to have given up an existing job? (Moyes was never coming to us after Man. U., and there were plenty of voices dreading the appointment of Pullis). I don’t know if Sherwood will be right for us – and the truth is neither does anyone else at this stage. The appointment of a successful manager is always a peculiar mix of good fortune and serendipity. Even Alex Ferguson came perilously close to being dismissed in his early days with Man. Utd. and was not a popular choice with their fans in those days. If you think Fox is such a waste of space who would you have had in his place – the thing that amazes me is that he wanted to come to us in the first place. But when he decided to move from Arsenal he chose to stay with football, and with us. I think he seriously wants to make a success of his time at Villa, and I think, given the status of his background, we should at least give him time.

Who cares anymore? – Unfortunately I do and I’d guess anyone who reads, and / or contributes to this forum, and a whole lot of others. Our frustrations become so acute because we realise that when it comes down to it there are few positive ways we can affect the fate of our Club. Every course of action suggested seems to have an associated negative impact. Although I think people beginning to stay away from games is an inevitable consequence of what is on offer. The current hierarchy seem to be contentedly sleepwalking us into the Championship. We keep waiting for someone to come up with a ’cunning plan’ that will change our fortunes in the nick of time, but I fear it’s a case of ‘not this time Baldrick’. I (and I suspect a lot of other contributors) followed the team down to the old Third Division and back again – plenty of dark days around then too. I remember sitting on the concrete terracing before the match, and standing up when the teams came out only because it seemed the polite thing to do. With crowds of less than 13000 you were never going to get your view blocked. Those number of people spread around Villa Park made it look a desperate place, and I feel that with the ground now being all-seating it could look even worse – people can’t spread out the way they did then. The most positive thing I took from those times was that I’m left with the conviction that it’s better to be challenging at the top of any division than struggling at the bottom of any division. I know this may sound like ‘stating the bleeding obvious’ but I remember feeling a whole lot happier when we were heading for promotion from the Third Division than I feel now. I saw this opening paragraph on a ‘mental health’ website (yes I know – what brings a Villa supporter looking at ‘mental health’ websites – can’t imagine, however): “Football can have a major impact on mental health. It is thought to affect emotions, relationships, identity and self-esteem. In a recent study, one in four fans said football was one of the most important things in their lives.” - I think they may be underestimating.

The MailOnline reports Villa as being interested in “bringing in Watford sporting director Luke Dowling” as they look to “restructure of the hierarchy of the club”. Apparently Dowling has only been at Watford since September 2014, and was previously at Leeds in a consultancy capacity - in May 2014 he turned down the chance to become Sporting Director with them. When he joined Watford his role was described by the Club as: · Working with the CEO to help give a truly all-encompassing feel to recruitment methods. · Working closely with the Head Coach to continually shape and perfect the balance of the first-team squad. · Adding an extra dimension and focus on the domestic market. (The reason I quote this is because personally I have no idea exactly what a Sporting Director / Director of Football actually does). Of course the fact that the MailOnline say Villa are interested doesn't mean we will get him, but perhaps it gives a pointer to the Club’s intentions.

For what it’s worth I sincerely hope that Paul Lambert ‘comes good’, and that we’ll all be able to look back on this period and realise that it was all part of a grand plan that we mere fans weren't able to see at the time, but……. whenever I hear a manager complaining that fans negatively affect the team by voicing their disapproval it makes me realise just how great the divide is between them and the fans. Because what they are saying is that fans should accept turning up every week / other week to watch unimaginative dross and not complain about it, totally ignoring the affects this has on the supporters. It‘s easy to believe that Lambert has never been an ‘ordinary’ supporter of a football club – never had to turn up at school / work on a Monday after yet another embarrassing, humiliating defeat, with no defence to the caustic comments of school or work mates – even worse when they sympathise. But give Lambert his due. One of the primary objectives of any team manager worth his salt is to convince his team that no matter what their shortcomings, his team are capable of beating any other team they play. Whilst Lambert hasn't managed this with Villa, he has managed to convince 19 other Premier League sides that no matter what their shortcomings, they are more than capable of beating Villa – and I'm not certain I should limit this to Premiership sides either. I bet Bournemouth supporters are looking forward to their trip.

Why am I reminded of the saying 'Lies, damned lies and statistics'. It saddens me to see so many loyal Villa supporters looking for crumbs of comfort in a ‘much improved display’ that still only got us one point against the bottom club in the division. Ok, we’ve got players out injured (suspended) but that’s football. I hear Wenger and van Gaal making the same complaint (sounds even more hollow coming from them though). A number of contributors have recommended taking a step back, and taking a more overall view as opposed to reacting positively or negatively to the latest game. Well, when I take a step back I see the football equivalent of a train wreck waiting to happen. From the side-lines we can all see that just around the bend the track we’re on disappears over the cliff, fans are shouting warnings at the top of their voices but no one seems to hear. The escape route that magically appears one week, when it was nowhere in sight the week before, only ever happened in Saturday Matinee episodes (apologies to younger members). So what can be changed? Ownership – this is definitely needed but nowhere on the horizon apparently. Team members – a general improvement in overall quality would be welcome but with the owner we have it’s not going to happen. Manager – not normally my first choice to replace a manager when things start to go wrong, but after two and a half years with no improvement I can’t see what other route there is. I accept he may have done well with the circumstances he’s been presented with, but we need someone to do even better. Unfortunately, barring a resignation, I can’t see this happening either - and that bend in the track is getting closer and closer.

It’s difficult to argue against the Lambert criticism – not that I'm inclined to. But to be honest I feel that I've no idea what quality of manager Lambert really is. Has he had a fair crack of the whip at Villa? Has he had a reasonable Premier League budget for players and just squandered it on (mainly) mediocrity? Does he fail to inspire Villa’s squad whereas another manager could get more out of them? Or, has he always had to manage against a background of belt-tightening and very limited funds - always looking for that hidden gem in the bargain basement? Does the style of football we play just reflect the quality of players we have? If you look at the records of Lambert and Robert Martinez for instance, they are quite similar up to Martinez joining Everton. In fact it is arguable that during his time in the Premiership with Norwich Lambert did better that Martinez did with Wigan. It seems odd that Martinez was widely praised for Wigan’s style of play when he was there, but saw them relegated. Was he just being too ambitious to think that the quality of players he had could survive in the premiership trying to play that way. Does Lambert feel that with what he’s got at his disposal the only chance of survival is to play the way his team does? Like I say I honestly don’t know – and the only way I see anything of any significance changing is with a change of ownership. It appears Lerner’s no longer interested, so even within the constraints of FFP I can’t see him wanting to spend a lot more money than he already has / does. My main beef with Lambert is that he’s been complicit in Lerner’s current philosophy of ‘Premiership on the cheap’. Perhaps that’s how he got the job, perhaps that’s how he keeps the job. The problem is that even if Lambert were to go Lerner would find someone else to take the job on the same basis – but it wouldn't be anyone of the proven quality we’d like to see.

When you have an owner that doesn't really understand football or football people, those he appoints to effectively run the Club for him become even more significant. I used to think the one and only crucial appointment was the manager, but since following this thread I've come to think that a really good CEO can be just as significant. The problem here is that Lerner's staff appointments as owner of the Cleveland Browns were notoriously bad - and reports tell us he is now about to appoint a new CEO for us! If he gets this one right, that is if we end up with someone we would like (e.g. Cortese), then there may be a glimmer of hope on the horizon, in as much as I can't believe anyone of a suitable character would take on the CEO role without telling Lerner the football facts of life and what needs to be done. Of course the reverse of this is that if we end up with another 'yes' man then we're completely in the dog-do. Never thought I'd be this interested in a CEO appointment - never thought I could hold my breath for so long - fingers crossed, touch wood, whatever.

Just been listening to a short telephone conversation between Johnny Gould and Howard Hodgson (http://jonnygould.blogspot.co.uk/) posted yesterday. Not a lot in it that we didn't know, Howard Hodgson would also like to see Cortese in the CEO role but has no ITK information, and feels that the main difficulty with a sale is that Villa would have serious financial problems if they fall out of the Premiership (unlike Fulham who have the attraction of a ground so close to London). The most interesting thing for me was that Johnny Gould speaks as if it's fact that Lerner has now decided not to sell (mainly because of the problems he's having finding a buyer at the price), and the appointment of a new CEO is his opening attempt to try to make a go of things. We live in interesting times.

I find it difficult to believe that Randy is as poor a businessman as his involvement with our club has led us to believe. After all he is a billionaire (just), and although a huge chunk of his wealth was inherited from his father (2002) he has managed to hang onto it (sort of). So I thought I’d check the internet sources for some reassurance. I looked back at Randy’s sale of the Cleveland Browns to see if there could be a clue as to his modus operandi. Reports on Cleveland.com state that in June 2012 Lerner denied a report on NBC that the Cleveland Browns were up for sale (perhaps he’d just forgotten), and then in July 2012 confirmed that they were (oh, those Cleveland Browns) – and by August 2012 the deal was done! It seems the fans had no idea this was in the pipeline until it happened (but you have to ask, did Randy either). I like to see this as a positive for us. Perhaps he has found a buyer that will transform us back into a football club. A buyer who understands the difference between a club being entertaining and being a laughing stock – he’s just forgotten to mention it. (Pigs all fed and ready to fly). However a couple of other comments from the same source: “The biggest constant among those Randy hired was a lack of judgement, bordering at times on a lack of professionalism.” “Randy Lerner wasn't a good owner by any means, but he wasn't a lucky one, either.” Oh, and in 2008 he donated £5 million to the National Portrait Gallery (anyone any good with a paintbrush? A couple of decent paintings and we could double our (rumoured) transfer budget). Anyway I’m reassured – Randy is as poor a businessman as we all fear!

Well it's August and the Club remains in limbo. The beginning of the new season and the end of the current transfer window seem frighteningly close. Thank goodness that since the 7th July Randy Lerner has turned his full attention back to Villa matters at hand; otherwise you could begin to believe we were in something of a mess. Personally I haven't noticed any difference from when he was focussing his attention on selling the Club - but I stand to be corrected. I took some comfort from the fact that the " sale process has been productive and remains ongoing", but I'm beginning to wonder exactly what that means. Does 'productive' mean that he's found out that no-one wants to buy us, and 'ongoing' merely means that the 'for sale' sign is still in place? Despite him being a self-confessed anglophile I'm still not convinced that when it comes to football and football supporters Mr Lerner quite 'gets it'. Perhaps it's spending your formative years with the American game and culture that makes it difficult to fully understand what football and a football club means to a British fan. And if he does, how on earth can he be prepared to preside over the current debacle. Even just to protect his investment you'd imagine he'd be willing to spend a (comparatively) modest amount to try to ensure continuing Premier League status - ye gods the season hasn't started yet and my focus is on survival (again). Still we have to have faith that 'productive' and 'ongoing' mean more than I fear, and that Mr Lerner's "full attention to Villa matters at hand" will make a significant difference - please, PLEASE!

I read a while ago that Red Bull were interested in purchasing a club that they could take into the Champions League in order to further promote their global branding. They saw this as ideally being a London club (presumably because of the automatic recognition of the city globally), but also considered both Liverpool and Everton because they didn't think it would take much for them to reach the required standard (and, I suspect because the city has such a well-known football heritage which would promote well on a global stage). It makes you wonder if Manchester City would have been such a favourable takeover proposition if it hadn't shared some of the kudos the city has gained from Manchester United's exploits. I also heard recently that business luminaries such as Lord Digby Jones and the John Lewis boss Andy Street would like to see the West Midlands region market itself under the umbrella title 'Greater Birmingham' on the basis (they say) that overseas Birmingham is well known (businesswise) whereas other areas in the Midlands are not. So it could be true that we may have had more interest from potential buyers if Villa were more readily perceived as coming from Birmingham, and as being THE football club of the City. We know it's true and the rest of the UK know it, but does the rest of the world - and if it doesn't, how do we change that without the club already being successful?

I don't know if this is optimistic, pessimistic or just plain crazy, but something's been puzzling me that doesn't seem to have warranted the usual minute dissection that most events get here. Paul Faulkner leaving Villa was not an event instigated by him. Something happened to make his position (in his eyes) untenable. It's been suggested that he fell out with Lerner over the lack of funds being made available - but that doesn't have a ring of truth for me. If anyone knew what Lerner's intentions were it would have been Faulkner. So something had changed and Lerner's former 'blue-eyed' boy could not stay at Villa in his CEO role. Given that Faulkner would have expected to leave anyway if the club were sold, it must have been something outside of that. What would make him leave now and not wait for a sale? Interestingly some recent posts suggest the club isn't going to be sold. Could we have a scenario in which Lerner remains 'involved' with the club but Faulkner can't Could it be that we're going to see a new partnership / consortium (that includes Lerner), and part of that agreement insists on a new CEO. Lerner effectively stays, Faulkner can't. Faulkner sees it as a loss of 'face' to be replaced or moved sideways. Just some thoughts.

Hi Folks, This is my 'Welcome' post. I started supporting the Villa because my dad did. The first game I took my (now) wife to was at Villa park against Everton (I still have nightmares about Alan Ball's squeaky voice). Villa lost and were relegated from the then Division 1 - so no need to mention my age. I find VillaTalk fascinating. Sometimes it's like we're all sitting around the same pub table - and just like then I find it difficult to keep my mouth shut. Hope I'm accepted. John.