BG_Villa_Fan Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can't find it but someone posted the wages of the last mcleish starting 11 and the current best 11. McLeish's team was about £470k and Lamberts was more like £250k. And? What would such a random fantasy thing prove? The actual accounts the club posted clearly indicate the wage bill has increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted April 25, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 25, 2014 only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78% Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? Or do you really think a man who took Norwich from League One to the Prem in successive seasons would not have done a better job if his remit wasn't to halve the wage bill and build an entirely new squad in 12 months with £40m? You don't think there's plenty of examples of managers and players who have performed well in the lower leagues who then struggled at the top level? Honestly, I think half the time you see "defence" and "excuses" which simply aren't there in the first place. There getting less and less but there's been plenty over these 2 years. There are plenty yes, but that's not the point though is it, you asked whether the constraints be used as an excuse, the constraints are very real and obvious and as such have certianly affected what it was possible to do. My point is that he's probably a better manager than he's currently getting credit for on here, as his record would suggest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romavillan Posted April 25, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can't find it but someone posted the wages of the last mcleish starting 11 and the current best 11. McLeish's team was about £470k and Lamberts was more like £250k. And? What would such a random fantasy thing prove? The actual accounts the club posted clearly indicate the wage bill has increased. random fantasy thing? i've got to work otherwise I'd try and find it for you. what it proves is that the starting 11's wages are saving us £200k a week. I think that's obviousl though right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaGoMarching Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 Lambert has to go IMO, his reputation is in tatters, and he has very little backing amongst home supporters. In fact why not get rid now? Look at the boost it's given united fans to get done interim fan favorites to take charge of the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78%Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one?Or do you really think a man who took Norwich from League One to the Prem in successive seasons would not have done a better job if his remit wasn't to halve the wage bill and build an entirely new squad in 12 months with £40m? You don't think there's plenty of examples of managers and players who have performed well in the lower leagues who then struggled at the top level? Honestly, I think half the time you see "defence" and "excuses" which simply aren't there in the first place. There getting less and less but there's been plenty over these 2 years. There are plenty yes, but that's not the point though is it, you asked whether the constraints be used as an excuse, the constraints are very real and obvious and as such have certianly affected what it was possible to do. My point is that he's probably a better manager than he's currently getting credit for on here, as his record would suggest. I think that's questionable. I think stats like the one posted on TBAR show that regardless of financial constraints he's done a very poor job. Worst home form in the history of the club and highest loss percentage in 50 years. Those 2 are quite shocking stats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can't find it but someone posted the wages of the last mcleish starting 11 and the current best 11. McLeish's team was about £470k and Lamberts was more like £250k. And? What would such a random fantasy thing prove? The actual accounts the club posted clearly indicate the wage bill has increased. random fantasy thing? i've got to work otherwise I'd try and find it for you. what it proves is that the starting 11's wages are saving us £200k a week. I think that's obviousl though right? Unless you can provide a source with the players actual wages, not the guesswork ones, it really isn't obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can't find it but someone posted the wages of the last mcleish starting 11 and the current best 11. McLeish's team was about £470k and Lamberts was more like £250k. And? What would such a random fantasy thing prove? The actual accounts the club posted clearly indicate the wage bill has increased. random fantasy thing? i've got to work otherwise I'd try and find it for you. what it proves is that the starting 11's wages are saving us £200k a week. I think that's obviousl though right? No it proves that Lambert had over £200k of unused resources that he didn't utilise 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78% Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and fond reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78% Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm getting confused: is the claim that Lambert is running his first team on £250K a week supposed to be evidence of what a good manager he is, or a reason why his results have been so poor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I can't find it but someone posted the wages of the last mcleish starting 11 and the current best 11. McLeish's team was about £470k and Lamberts was more like £250k. And? What would such a random fantasy thing prove? The actual accounts the club posted clearly indicate the wage bill has increased. Isn't it obvious the wages on the accounts still showed a number of players that have either now left or on their way out due to when the accounts ran up to. I'm sure players like dunne, Ireland, Collins etc were still showing on their as we were paying then during that time. However the next set of accounts won't show these players, hence him reducing our wage bill. I'm sure we don't have to wait until then to realise that he's done that, it really is quite obvious. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm getting confused: is the claim that Lambert is running his first team on £250K a week supposed to be evidence of what a good manager he is, or a reason why his results have been so poor? A bit of both I guess, be interesting to compare the starting 11 wages with the other teams, I'd bet we'd be lower than our league placing has us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. The "reasons" to absolve him of being tagged a poor manager constituting excuses. Good play of semantics though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm getting confused: is the claim that Lambert is running his first team on £250K a week supposed to be evidence of what a good manager he is, or a reason why his results have been so poor? A bit of both I guess, be interesting to compare the starting 11 wages with the other teams, I'd bet we'd be lower than our league placing has us. So his ability to run a premier league first team on a shoestring is evidence of how good he is at getting poor results but not as poor as they might be. I think I'm getting the hang of this argument now. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78%Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and fond reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78%Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. Yes reasons to excuse him of the blame. When in reality worst home form in the history of the club and the worst loss percentage of any villa manager in 50 years is really down to him as a manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm getting confused: is the claim that Lambert is running his first team on £250K a week supposed to be evidence of what a good manager he is, or a reason why his results have been so poor? A bit of both I guess, be interesting to compare the starting 11 wages with the other teams, I'd bet we'd be lower than our league placing has us. So his ability to run a premier league first team on a shoestring is evidence of how good he is at getting poor results but not as poor as they might be. I think I'm getting the hang of this argument now. Put it this way, one caller last week after the game told the presenter we have a league 1 standard team, the presenter said but you're still in the premiership so is Lambert over achieving a working a miracle with these league 1 standard players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Lions_Roar Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. The "reasons" to absolve him of being tagged a poor manager constituting excuses. Good play of semantics though. Right, so reasons are now excuses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit.The "reasons" to absolve him of being tagged a poor manager constituting excuses. Good play of semantics though. Right, so reasons are now excuses? When used to excuse the poor performance of someone you're arguing for then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BG_Villa_Fan Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I'm getting confused: is the claim that Lambert is running his first team on £250K a week supposed to be evidence of what a good manager he is, or a reason why his results have been so poor? A bit of both I guess, be interesting to compare the starting 11 wages with the other teams, I'd bet we'd be lower than our league placing has us. So his ability to run a premier league first team on a shoestring is evidence of how good he is at getting poor results but not as poor as they might be. I think I'm getting the hang of this argument now. Put it this way, one caller last week after the game told the presenter we have a league 1 standard team, the presenter said but you're still in the premiership so is Lambert over achieving a working a miracle with these league 1 standard players? This is very subjective though. Using the same logic MON must have been a genious to get top 6 with a team that had the likes of Dunne, Collins, Warnock, Cuellar, Sidwell, NRC, Gabby, Heskey, etc as important first teamers. Yet most would say he should have got top 4 with what he's had to work with. Again - same logic - the current team has players like Benteke, Guzan, Vlaar and Delph, that would be rated very highly by the vast majority of posters on Villatalk, yet Lambert hasn't been able to get more than around 40 points with them. Which players from teams who are in the relegation scrap, say from 10th down, would you take over these 4? Not too many, probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 25, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 25, 2014 only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78% Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and fond reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. only 2 Managers who have lost a higher % of their games in charge: Dick Taylor 49.31% Tommy Cummings 48.39% Paul Lambert 45.78% Interesting stat from the TBAR forum. Can the constraints he's worked under really excuse that one? No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit. Yes reasons to excuse him of the blame. When in reality worst home form in the history of the club and the worst loss percentage of any villa manager in 50 years is really down to him as a manager. Big John, would you happen to know how Lambert's home form and loss percentage compares to previous managers and the history of the club? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 No one excuses it, but they try and find reasons as to why it may of happened instead of just saying he's shit.The "reasons" to absolve him of being tagged a poor manager constituting excuses. Good play of semantics though. Right, so reasons are now excuses? When used to excuse the poor performance of someone you're arguing for then yes. One man's reason is another man's excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts