Paul Lambert

[suttonpaul]

I try not to let this thread wind me up but I feel some people are missing the point of the more 'pro-Lambert' argument. It's fine to disagree with it or not place the same importance on some mitigating circumstances but some just seem to completely miss the point in the argument for Lambert.

No-one is saying he's marvelous, no-one is saying they are happy with either the squad, the playing style or the results. What they are saying is the bulk of the blame is not Lambert's but Lerner's. I hate our style, a number of players are substandard and it is a horrible time to be a fan.

People are saying we 'should' be able to compete with the likes of West Ham and Sunderland etc, why? Last season we did which is a credit to Lambert as he spent less than them. This season they all strengthened. Someone mentioned "we're as bad as Burnley, Leicester, Palace and QPR" - we SHOULD be! Only one of them has invested less than us! What gives us a divine right to be higher than these teams? They invested in their squad, we didn't. Yet we're still in there fighting. Based on CURRENT transfers and wages (i.e. not those inherited from MON or McLeish) our top signing is £4.5m Sanchez! We operate as a small team trying to survive. So, whilst very very unhappy about it, Lambert is succeeding in keeping us up. Is that good enough? Clearly not, but Lambert can't do anything about it, only Lerner can.

Please name any other team that has both played better and finished higher than us in recent years who has invested the same amount we have. Wigan played better and got relegated, others spent.

And for the record, of those teams we should 'compete' with as a divine right (anyone outside last years top 6) we have only lost to QPR this season.

What he said

[George Curtis]

It seems that we should be just happy with our lot and not want more.

We all want more but bitching and moaning about it isn't going to make Lerner sell up any quicker is it.

Especially considering the Club is no longer up for sale.

Club isn't up for sale ? If true shit just got a whole lot worse

I don't believe that for a second. as the old saying goes: everything has its price.

Lerner's just trying not to look desperate.

Of course everything has its price. By that, you can assume that Man Utd and Chelsea are also for sale.

[Matt1874]

You seem to want to only judge him when everything is going his way and is perfect. That's not football and that's not life. I'm sure a lot of managers look better when you only judge games where everything was set up right for them.

Again this is nonsense, I said Benteke. Specifically that player. Not everything in his favour. I'm talking about by far and away our best and most important player. At our level our equivalent to Suarez or Ronaldo.

There is no denying that Benteke is our best striker. Unfortunately our game plan changes when he is in the side and it becomes 'hoofball' from the defence and goalkeeper in the hope that he can win some headers and get some knock downs.

If Lambert had the nouse he would employ wingers (as we did when we had Young and Downing) to give him a supply that he deserves and no doubt craves for.

Agree with this. The only occasional decent service Benteke gets is when Lowton's on the pitch. Most of the time he's left to basically make goals for himself. I'd play Lowton and Grealish on the wings as I see no better option

[VillakevBromsgrove]

I do not think it will be long before PL is forced to change the style, Falling crowds, negative press, bad statistics, everything is pointing to him being shown the door sooner rather than later. Bad results we can cope with, poor football and negative tactics - never. Lets see how we set our selves up against the mighty Burnley, No excuses, if he does not go for it against them then I will be among others shouting from the roof tops for him to go. We just have not got any balance in the team, we buy players and sit them on the bench, Is Cole really not good enough to play in this team? Why?  the list of players he has brought and not used is ridiculous, My biggest concern is there is no plan, no improvement, no confidence, a lack of movement and vision from the players, Something at the club is very wrong and needs sorting. Players have to know if they do not produce they are dropped, there is no evidence of this with certain players who can do no wrong.

[DCJonah]

No-one is saying he's marvelous, no-one is saying they are happy with either the squad, the playing style or the results. What they are saying is the bulk of the blame is not Lambert's but Lerner's. I hate our style, a number of players are substandard and it is a horrible time to be a fan.

That's not the impression I get. If this was what was being said I doubt there would be many disagreements on here.

People are saying we 'should' be able to compete with the likes of West Ham and Sunderland etc, why? Last season we did which is a credit to Lambert as he spent less than them

This kind of contradicts the first thing. You're saying credit to him for achieving the same points total as McLeish.

Based on CURRENT transfers and wages (i.e. not those inherited from MON or McLeish) our top signing is £4.5m Sanchez!

Why would you ignore players he inherited? Do they not play?

So, whilst very very unhappy about it, Lambert is succeeding in keeping us up. Is that good enough? Clearly not, but Lambert can't do anything about it, only Lerner can.

So you give him credit for getting 38 points last year but say there's nothing he can about making us better. That's pretty win win for the manager there. And if there's nothing he can do without spending lots 3 years down the line then why would you want to stick with him? Do you not want a manager who can make things better with coaching, tactics and man management?

[Brumstopdogs]

No-one is saying he's marvelous, no-one is saying they are happy with either the squad, the playing style or the results. What they are saying is the bulk of the blame is not Lambert's but Lerner's. I hate our style, a number of players are substandard and it is a horrible time to be a fan.

 

People are saying we 'should' be able to compete with the likes of West Ham and Sunderland etc, why? Last season we did which is a credit to Lambert as he spent less than them. This season they all strengthened. Someone mentioned "we're as bad as Burnley, Leicester, Palace and QPR" - we SHOULD be! Only one of them has invested less than us! 

 

So no one is happy with the squad, the playing style or the results.

 

On that basis he has to go! It is HIS squad, it is the playing style HE has created, the substandard players are ones he has purchased or existing ones he has failed to get the best out of and the results are a direct reflection of that. The horrible time to be a fan again is due to the way HE sets up the team. 

 

I'm convinced that another manager could have done a much better job and I'm convinced another manager coming in now could still do a better job. Football is entertainment and fans, generally, don't want to travel 100 odd miles (in some cases) to see us try to defend for what feels like the majority of most matches. He has took the fun out of supporting Villa as McLeish did years earlier.

 

As for teams investing more than us that fails to consider all the previous transfer windows.  It also fails to consider that football is not only about buying players but selling players too. 

 

A quick look at the net spends of clubs in the three seasons where we have been "graced" by Lambert:

 

Aston Villa - approx £46m net outlay.

Burnley - negative net spend.

Leiceister - a net spend of less than a third of what Lambert has spent.

Palace - our net spend is comfortably double theirs.

Stoke - our net spend is approximately double theirs.

Newcastle - our net spend is over double theirs.

Southampton - our net spend is over £10m theirs (admittedly supplemented by some big sales)

Swansea - our net spend is over triple theirs.

Spurs - our net spend is much bigger than theirs (admittedly supplemented by the Bale sale)

Sunderland - our net spend is more than theirs.

West Brom - our net spend is over double theirs.

 

Pretty grim reading really - but one thing is clear - he HAS to go. 

 

Lambert out.

Edited November 26, 2014 by Brumstopdogs

[Stevo985]

*Theirs

[mykeyb]

At my local leisure centre they have a free sports magazine which I picked up because there is an article in there about how Southampton are set-up, how they scout players, how they decided on a replacement when their manager left and it makes you realise we a run awfully, so poorly I doubt there are many clubs who are run worse than us. We seem to think that having a fancy training centre is the answer to all our troubles and its not.

 

Lambert is by no means the whole reason we are where we are but he is without doubt one of the bigger factors, and the fact he signed a new deal makes you question his ambition because you cannot really see there being a huge change at the club so if he is happy to just try and survive in the Premiership, is he really the man we want to be our manager?

[sexbelowsound]

 

No-one is saying he's marvelous, no-one is saying they are happy with either the squad, the playing style or the results. What they are saying is the bulk of the blame is not Lambert's but Lerner's. I hate our style, a number of players are substandard and it is a horrible time to be a fan.

 

People are saying we 'should' be able to compete with the likes of West Ham and Sunderland etc, why? Last season we did which is a credit to Lambert as he spent less than them. This season they all strengthened. Someone mentioned "we're as bad as Burnley, Leicester, Palace and QPR" - we SHOULD be! Only one of them has invested less than us! 

 

So no one is happy with the squad, the playing style or the results.

 

On that basis he has to go! It is HIS squad, it is the playing style HE has created, the substandard players are ones he has purchased or existing ones he has failed to get the best out of and the results are a direct reflection of that. The horrible time to be a fan again is due to the way HE sets up the team. 

 

I'm convinced that another manager could have done a much better job and I'm convinced another manager coming in now could still do a better job. Football is entertainment and fans, generally, don't want to travel 100 odd miles (in some cases) to see us try to defend for what feels like the majority of most matches. He has took the fun out of supporting Villa as McLeish did years earlier.

 

As for teams investing more than us that fails to consider all the previous transfer windows.  It also fails to consider that football is not only about buying players but selling players too. 

 

A quick look at the net spends of clubs in the three seasons where we have been "graced" by Lambert:

 

Aston Villa - approx £46m net outlay.

Burnley - negative net spend.

Leiceister - a net spend of less than a third of what Lambert has spent.

Palace - our net spend is comfortably double theres.

Stoke - our net spend is approximately double theres.

Newcastle - our net spend is over double theres.

Southampton - our net spend is over £10m theres (admittedly supplemented by some big sales)

Swansea - our net spend is over triple theres.

Spurs - our net spend is much bigger than theres (admittedly supplemented by the Bale sale)

Sunderland - our net spend is more than theres.

West Brom - our net spend is over double theres.

 

Pretty grim reading really - but one thing is clear - he HAS to go. 

 

Lambert out.

 

 

Net spend is misleading compared to fees spent as it includes players sold and is more of an indication of finances rather than squad strength. By the time Lambert got here our assets had already been stripped making it near impossible to have a negative net spend.

 

 

Newcastle have spent more than we have over that period and added them to a squad that hadn't already been asset stripped.

Edited November 26, 2014 by sexbelowsound

[CVByrne]

This is the DCJonah thread now 

 

What is good though is that Lerner won't listen to any of you lot. He will give the manager the full season (as he should unless we are mired 4 points adrift in relegation zone) and then make his decision at the end if we need a new manager, or if we can get new owners by then they can get a new manager.

 

The rash owners that lack the confidence and intelligence to ignore the irrational mob that is disgruntled fans, those are the ones that get their clubs relegated. 

 

Big Sam was hated by the West Ham mob, they are a lot quieter now aren't they.

[Brumstopdogs]

 

Net spend is misleading compared to fees spent as it includes players sold and is more of an indication of finances rather than squad strength. By the time Lambert got here our assets had already been stripped making it near impossible to have a negative net spend.

 

 

Newcastle have spent more than we have over that period and added them to a squad that hadn't already been asset stripped.

 

So part of being a football manager isn't selling players and getting the maximum value for them? Not all of our assets had been stripped - he hasn't got the most out of a number of them. On the flip side he has also wasted funds and not purchased players where we need them.

[sexbelowsound]

 

 

Net spend is misleading compared to fees spent as it includes players sold and is more of an indication of finances rather than squad strength. By the time Lambert got here our assets had already been stripped making it near impossible to have a negative net spend.

 

 

Newcastle have spent more than we have over that period and added them to a squad that hadn't already been asset stripped.

 

So part of being a football manager isn't selling players and getting the maximum value for them? Not all of our assets had been stripped - he hasn't got the most out of a number of them. On the flip side he has also wasted funds and not purchased players where we need them.

 

 

I didn't say it wasn't part of it. What I'm saying is that using the net spend argument is a misleading way of making it look like Lambert has outspent loads of other managers when the reality is that he hasn't. Who are these assets that we had then when Lambert turned up?

[briny_ear]

What is good though is that Lerner won't listen to any of you lot.

Phew!!!

 

At least theirs a bit of good news then!

 

[AvfcRigo82]

I was not surprised to see Villa Park half empty on Monday night, regardless of the match being on television!

[Brumstopdogs]

I didn't say it wasn't part of it. What I'm saying is that using the net spend argument is a misleading way of making it look like Lambert has outspent loads of other managers when the reality is that he hasn't. Who are these assets that we had then when Lambert turned up?

 

The net spend argument is not misleading at all. Part of a managers job I would suggest (apart from the on the pitch side where he is failing) is to get the maximum value for a player and sell them at the right time. Just looking at who he has purchased is too simplistic and fails to consider a) how he has improved the squad he has inherited and b ) what value he has sold players for in order to then, ideally, reinvest funds in the future.

 

Two examples for you:

 

Darren Bent - purchased for £18m. When Lambert joined he was in consideration for the England set-up and had just finished the season scoring 9 goals in 22 league games. Likely transfer value recouped: £0m. IMO Lambert could have played him in his first season and then sold him and for a proven premier league goalscorer IMO would have got over £10m for him.

 

Newcastle (you mentioned them):

Purchased: Debuchy for £5.5m in 12/13 then sold him for £12.0m in 14/15. The manager has created £6.5m by his own dealings. By your logic we would ignore the fact  he has made a profit!

Edited November 26, 2014 by Brumstopdogs

[Richard]

Daren Bent.  What people are failing to understand is that Paul made him captain,  Bent failed to perform or want to perform.  Bent reduced Bents value not Lambert

[Brumstopdogs]

Daren Bent.  What people are failing to understand is that Paul made him captain,  Bent failed to perform or want to perform.  Bent reduced Bents value not Lambert

So he could score for Bruce, score for Mcleish and score for Houllier but for some how he didn't want to perform for Lambert.

 

One asset at the club wasted by Lambert.

 

His answer now is seemingly to pay £8m for Cleverley - yeah that'll sort us out!

[AvfcRigo82]

Again it is time for a change of manager at B6, someone who has tactical nouse, a no nonsense philosophy, motivation and desire to get the best out of what he has at his disposal and ability to get the best out of what he has.

 

Unfortunately this is not happening with our current manager and I can't see it happening anytime soon.

[sexbelowsound]

 

I didn't say it wasn't part of it. What I'm saying is that using the net spend argument is a misleading way of making it look like Lambert has outspent loads of other managers when the reality is that he hasn't. Who are these assets that we had then when Lambert turned up?

 

The net spend argument is not misleading at all. Part of a managers job I would suggest (apart from the on the pitch side where he is failing) is to get the maximum value for a player and sell them at the right time. Just looking at who he has purchased is too simplistic and fails to consider a) how he has improved the squad he has inherited and b ) what value he has sold players for in order to then, ideally, reinvest funds in the future.

 

Two examples for you:

 

Darren Bent - purchased for £18m. When Lambert joined he was in consideration for the England set-up and had just finished the season scoring 9 goals in 22 league games. Likely transfer value recouped: £0m. IMO Lambert could have played him in his first season and then sold him and for a proven premier league goalscorer IMO would have got over £10m for him.

 

Newcastle (you mentioned them):

Purchased: Debuchy for £5.5m in 12/13 then sold him for £12.0m in 14/15. The manager has created £6.5m by his own dealings. By your logic we would ignore the fact  he has made a profit!

 

 

Yes it is misleading because you still haven't shown me where these supposed assets are for us to sell. Our squad was paper thin and full of bang average players. Where are the sales coming from?

 

The Bent example? Come on now. Bent hasn't been a valuable asset I would suggest since we bought him and by that i mean we were always going to lose money on him after the fee we spent. 

 

Difference being Newcastle were able to sell players on because they didn't have an already weak and depleted squad and weren't being told to cut costs.

[AvfcRigo82]

FWIW  Bent leaves on a free in the summer, as does Delph (Vlaar will be gone in Jan)