We don't know who they approached/discussed it with other than McLeish BUT if they couldn't find a candidate better than him then I believe that says that they do not have the ability to sell the club and their vision and, if this is the case, something desperately needs to change in the Villa hierarchy.
What if the vision has been changed? What if Mr. Lerner has started to think about cutting and minimizing the losses, and getting back as much of his investment as possible by selling the most priced assets and cutting the cost of wages? I remember Pauladonya saying "asset stripping", and I thought he was out of line. But we have now sold our best player three summers in a row, and with an unpopular appointment, it will be easy for Bent and Downing to follow and give some serious money next summer. Bent was a good investment, Lerner saved 40 mill when we did not get relegated, and he has some serious value.
I'm not sure, but I don't like what I'm seeing at the moment. I felt there was something wrong when MON walked, and I never bought the blame card he was dealt.
Firslty, I wouldn't say Young was our best player, he played a few minutes for england and wanted more.
Second, why as a chairman pay up to 24 million for 1 player if you want to cut your losses.
Third, by all accounts Lerner hs always thought McLeish is the dogs ballericks, so maybe it was his first choice. Lets not pretend we know what goes through any ones head. Even though the whole idea of it is quite sickenning in my oppinion, there are other factors. only time can tell and we all know time is a harsh mistress