Paul Lambert

[useless]

Am i right in saying Pullis couldn't get Stoke above 10th despite all the money they spent? He did a good job at Palace but that could have been a momentum thing. I think some fans would soon tire of his ceiling and style of football.

[The Fun Factory]

The revisionist history of the Houllier era is as staggering as it is false in my view.

If I am being cheeky you could take the revisionist view that O'Leary did a pretty good job. Top 6, League Cup Semi,  and Top 10 in first 2 years and a Lambert season in the third. And he had Ellis as a chairman.He might have been  a prat but if my  memory doesn't trick me, we sometimes played well and won at home under him.

Edited October 28, 2014 by The Fun Factory

[AshVilla]

 

Nobody would dare even mention Pulis if it wasn't for his lucky few months with Palace. Can't believe so many have fallen for it.

 

Pulis showed more managerial ability in those "few months" with Palace than Lambert ever has in his 3 years at Villa

 

The door couldn't hit Lambert hard enough on the way out

 

Fair enough if some want to give him time but i'd like to see Villa become a midtable team sometime in my lifetime

 

How long do people want to give him exactly? 5 10 15 20 years?

Edited October 28, 2014 by AshVilla

[Mantis]

The contract is secondary for me - I just can't see many willing to come here with the spending restrictions and uncertainty over the ownership.

[Xela]

Lambert out. 

 

Appalling manager.

[Mantis]

How long do people want to give him exactly? 5 10 15 20 years?

If we got this ownership situation sorted I don't think many would want to even give him another year, and I'd class myself among that group.

[dn1982]

Have any of the people who stand by Lambert given a reason why? I've been an ardent supporter but have had enough and can't see it improving. The only reason I can see is better the devil you know but I can't see anyone doing worse now.

[GENTLEMAN]

It is very unlikely Lambert will be fired IMO.

[Xela]

Have any of the people who stand by Lambert given a reason why? I've been an ardent supporter but have had enough and can't see it improving. The only reason I can see is better the devil you know but I can't see anyone doing worse now.

 

Stubborness? They've backed him for so long they don't want to be seen to change their minds? Maybe

 

If Lambert is the best option for this club now then we might as well shut the club down. 

[AshVilla]

It is very unlikely Lambert will be fired IMO.

 

We might as well start preparing for the championship then

[The Fun Factory]

He should have gone in the summer.

He should have gone after Bradford. I still get a nervous twitch when that club is mentioned.

[avfc1982]

Am i right in saying Pullis couldn't get Stoke above 10th despite all the money they spent? He did a good job at Palace but that could have been a momentum thing. I think some fans would soon tire of his ceiling and style of football.

Exactly!

Our stock has fallen so much over the last few years some fans are calling for hoofball merchant Pulis to take over.

Lerner's got a lot to answer for.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

O'Leary was better than Lambert. His league finishes and win ratio are better than anything Lambert has achieved.

And whether that letter was all about him, matters not one iota - it was still an important turning point, and was a small spark that created a huge fire of change.

As for his fickle comments. I didn't understand the uproar at the time and, I'd have thought, that even if it's very slowly, people have realised that he mentioned we have a "genuine bunch" and a "fickle mob". We do and it is wholly true. The thing he did wrong, however, was point out a very uncomfortable truth to the fans when he was already becoming unpopular.

Lambert is no where near our best manager in 30 years and is easily putting himself amongst the running as our worst.

[avfc1982]

With McLeish, and I'm sorry to say with lambert, I struggle to see what the plan is. I think Lambert had a plan when he started. But that got lost somewhere. Now I don't know what's going on.

I liked the 'young and hungry' idea and do believe that it was a viable blueprint to long-term progression - if executed successfully. Unfortunately Lambert wasted most of his budget on duds who were not particularly young anyway and more importantly, not very good.

There are numerous reasons why he should've been out on his arse already but in my opinion none bigger than when he did a complete u-turn and abandoned his original policy. That was a tacit admission that he has no conviction in his long-term plans and is now just making it up as he goes along. And a directionless manager makes for a directionless club.

The "young and hungry" idea was a lie. Cutbacks dressed up as a plan. I'm just surprised so many fans fell for it.

[The Fun Factory]

If Pulis threw a wobbly over spending at Palace, why would he come to Villa which has far more expectation and probably less money? Lambert is not going to get sacked anyway.

[Mantis]

 

Am i right in saying Pullis couldn't get Stoke above 10th despite all the money they spent? He did a good job at Palace but that could have been a momentum thing. I think some fans would soon tire of his ceiling and style of football.

Exactly!

Our stock has fallen so much over the last few years some fans are calling for hoofball merchant Pulis to take over.

Lerner's got a lot to answer for.

 

I think it's got less to do with our stock and more to do with the owner's unwillingness to spend.

[Villan4Life]

 

 

What if I still have the opinion that I support the manager and that I do not think I am "wrong" to use your term .  Am I to believe that the converse of your post applies,  that there is shame in that and the only redemption I can get is bowing to a different opinion than I hold?

 

At this stage I still have support for the manager.  That is a stance I am entitled to hold ,  there is no shame in that either.

Indeed you are and I was merely challenging your stance, which is the basic purpose of a forum I believe.

As for 'being wrong', I was referring specifically to your claim that Lambert is the best manager we've had in the last 30 years. Do you still believe this? If yes, then may I ask your reasoning as to why?

 

I posted a long post some time back to justify that stance,  cant remember all of it but I'll try and do the same again.

 

The managerial appointments we have made in the last 30 years are

 

Turner

Mcneill

Taylor MK1

Venglos

Atkinson

Little

Gregory

Taylor Mk2

Oleary

Oneill

Houllier 

Mcleish

 

(I'm ignoring the interim and caretaker types like Aitken and Mcallister)

 

Each of those have operated in different circumstances and under differing strategies / philosophies and each have had unique circumstances and the changing football picture with which to contend as well so let me deal with them individually to show how I think Lamber stacks up.

 

Turner - Bought in in similar circumstances to Lambert to be honest.  A team that had been relatively successful but the owner wanting to cut back on costs and run it on the cheap brings in an up and coming manager with the spec of doing just that.  He reduced the wage bill and finally dismantled our champions and brought in largely up and coming players and then went on to sprinkle it with a bit odf experience.  He still actually went on a spending spree for the time he was operating in and outspent rivals.  Football at the time was not as cash rich or dominated by 3 or 4 clubs with the emphasis of trying to reach the top four so I would argue that he had easier circumstances within which to operate.  He failed and for me was not a person with the strength of character Lamber has.  Lamber is better than Turner IMO

 

Mcneill - Came in for a season and was woeful.  Lambert better than Mcneill

 

Taylor MK1 - The first real challenger to being one of our best appointments.  Graham came in after we had been relegated  but we were still a massive club.  Yes we were in a mess but far better than any team in the lower division IMO.  I do think he oversold our position at the time a little  and the reason for that was to play politics a bit with Ellis was was domineering and wanted to run things his way.  Graham's protestations over our position were exaggerated a little as a poke at Ellis.  He did bring us back,  not as champions.  And we did finish runners up as well as flirting with relegation,  but again the time was different and circumstances were easier for us.  He bought Cascarino when Sherringham would have won us the league!. 

 

Venglos - Foreign experiment number 1.  No contest Lambert wins for me.

 

Atkinson - Second real challenger.  Was flamboyant and so was his team.  Assembled a decent team on the back of the Platt money again at a time when it was not about money so much.  An aging manager though and so was his team.  It wasn't so much built for the future as for the immediate 3 years.  Won a trophy though and that doesearn him loads of brownie points.  He loses to Lambert in that Ron was more of a now manager and Lambert is more of a long term plan man,  IMO.  Close call here though

 

Little - Brought in as the game was changing,  won a trophy and we finished high in the league.  Spent huge amounts for us and at the time we were competing.  A definite build for the future man and for me the man who runs Lambert closest in the best managerial appointment stakes.  Its really close this and just a personal opinion for me on Lambo,  I could be persuaded though and Lambert could move down to second place.  His wastes on Collymore and Curcic do not help him.

 

Gregory - A bit wee a bit woo for me was JG.  Always just needed a couple more players.  Spent a fortune on the back of dwight yorke and although this will not be a popular opinion and those will disagree,  he did not spend it wisely.  he spent it on players for now,  more so than Ron did.  so 6M a piece for aging Merson and Dublin was basically sunk cost and never allowed us to recycle the cash.  Balaban,  Stone,  Kachloul,  Hadji. He was allowed to spend huge sums,  the kind of money Lambert would love to have I think.

 

Oleary - Not a nice man at all .  Never liked him crap manager Lambert is the better man by a mile and has a strategy which does not involve slagging the club off from top to bottom,  the letter to Ellis was more about Oleary than anything else,  we would not have that with Lambert.

 

Oneill - I loved the man and still do,  brilliant manager but was operating in a different world to Lambert.  Spent a huge amount of money,  but had to to play catch up.  One thing about Martin and I guess most successful people are the same,  he believed his own hype. Call it arrogance call it what you will  but I think you also have to be pragmatic enough to see your own faults and not believe you are always right.

 

Houllier - Failure. Just could not comprehend this appointment.  I think the word Dis was missing.

 

Mcleish - If I could not comprehend the appointment of Houllier then I am trying to block this one from my memory.  Not fit to lace the boots of Lambert IMO

 

Now I know some will come on and say about Mcleish and the results under him and show stats about them and how he may outscore Lambert etc etc,  but for me there's more to it than that.  He was a dreadful manager.  Other managers in this list will have better points total as well.

 

You know an opinion on the merits of a manager or how you rate them is largely subjective,  as is everything in football judgement really.   And i recognise my opinion on Lambert is in a minority of probably 1 on here.  But I still hold it.  Little and Taylor MK1 come close but I still think given the circumstances of the time,  where we were / are as a club at the time of appointment,  what strategy the managers were asked to work towards bearing all that and more in mind I rate Paul above the others.

 

Sure it may not work and sure he may leave the club in the near future I accept that.  But I truly believe given the circumstances some of the others had he would have out performed them and given where we were as a club and what was happening to us at the time he was appointed I am not sure any of the others could have done better or that there were other managers we could have got that could have done better

 

You do realise we finished runners up to Man Utd with Atkinson in charge in 92/93 and won the League Cup in 1994!! Something Lambert will never achieve with us and you believe he is better than Big Ron? whatever

[dn1982]

What if I still have the opinion that I support the manager and that I do not think I am "wrong" to use your term .  Am I to believe that the converse of your post applies,  that there is shame in that and the only redemption I can get is bowing to a different opinion than I hold?

 

At this stage I still have support for the manager.  That is a stance I am entitled to hold ,  there is no shame in that either.

Indeed you are and I was merely challenging your stance, which is the basic purpose of a forum I believe.

As for 'being wrong', I was referring specifically to your claim that Lambert is the best manager we've had in the last 30 years. Do you still believe this? If yes, then may I ask your reasoning as to why?

I posted a long post some time back to justify that stance,  cant remember all of it but I'll try and do the same again.

 

The managerial appointments we have made in the last 30 years are

 

Turner

Mcneill

Taylor MK1

Venglos

Atkinson

Little

Gregory

Taylor Mk2

Oleary

Oneill

Houllier 

Mcleish

 

(I'm ignoring the interim and caretaker types like Aitken and Mcallister)

 

Each of those have operated in different circumstances and under differing strategies / philosophies and each have had unique circumstances and the changing football picture with which to contend as well so let me deal with them individually to show how I think Lamber stacks up.

 

Turner - Bought in in similar circumstances to Lambert to be honest.  A team that had been relatively successful but the owner wanting to cut back on costs and run it on the cheap brings in an up and coming manager with the spec of doing just that.  He reduced the wage bill and finally dismantled our champions and brought in largely up and coming players and then went on to sprinkle it with a bit odf experience.  He still actually went on a spending spree for the time he was operating in and outspent rivals.  Football at the time was not as cash rich or dominated by 3 or 4 clubs with the emphasis of trying to reach the top four so I would argue that he had easier circumstances within which to operate.  He failed and for me was not a person with the strength of character Lamber has.  Lamber is better than Turner IMO

 

Mcneill - Came in for a season and was woeful.  Lambert better than Mcneill

 

Taylor MK1 - The first real challenger to being one of our best appointments.  Graham came in after we had been relegated  but we were still a massive club.  Yes we were in a mess but far better than any team in the lower division IMO.  I do think he oversold our position at the time a little  and the reason for that was to play politics a bit with Ellis was was domineering and wanted to run things his way.  Graham's protestations over our position were exaggerated a little as a poke at Ellis.  He did bring us back,  not as champions.  And we did finish runners up as well as flirting with relegation,  but again the time was different and circumstances were easier for us.  He bought Cascarino when Sherringham would have won us the league!. 

 

Venglos - Foreign experiment number 1.  No contest Lambert wins for me.

 

Atkinson - Second real challenger.  Was flamboyant and so was his team.  Assembled a decent team on the back of the Platt money again at a time when it was not about money so much.  An aging manager though and so was his team.  It wasn't so much built for the future as for the immediate 3 years.  Won a trophy though and that doesearn him loads of brownie points.  He loses to Lambert in that Ron was more of a now manager and Lambert is more of a long term plan man,  IMO.  Close call here though

 

Little - Brought in as the game was changing,  won a trophy and we finished high in the league.  Spent huge amounts for us and at the time we were competing.  A definite build for the future man and for me the man who runs Lambert closest in the best managerial appointment stakes.  Its really close this and just a personal opinion for me on Lambo,  I could be persuaded though and Lambert could move down to second place.  His wastes on Collymore and Curcic do not help him.

 

Gregory - A bit wee a bit woo for me was JG.  Always just needed a couple more players.  Spent a fortune on the back of dwight yorke and although this will not be a popular opinion and those will disagree,  he did not spend it wisely.  he spent it on players for now,  more so than Ron did.  so 6M a piece for aging Merson and Dublin was basically sunk cost and never allowed us to recycle the cash.  Balaban,  Stone,  Kachloul,  Hadji. He was allowed to spend huge sums,  the kind of money Lambert would love to have I think.

 

Oleary - Not a nice man at all .  Never liked him crap manager Lambert is the better man by a mile and has a strategy which does not involve slagging the club off from top to bottom,  the letter to Ellis was more about Oleary than anything else,  we would not have that with Lambert.

 

Oneill - I loved the man and still do,  brilliant manager but was operating in a different world to Lambert.  Spent a huge amount of money,  but had to to play catch up.  One thing about Martin and I guess most successful people are the same,  he believed his own hype. Call it arrogance call it what you will  but I think you also have to be pragmatic enough to see your own faults and not believe you are always right.

 

Houllier - Failure. Just could not comprehend this appointment.  I think the word Dis was missing.

 

Mcleish - If I could not comprehend the appointment of Houllier then I am trying to block this one from my memory.  Not fit to lace the boots of Lambert IMO

 

Now I know some will come on and say about Mcleish and the results under him and show stats about them and how he may outscore Lambert etc etc,  but for me there's more to it than that.  He was a dreadful manager.  Other managers in this list will have better points total as well.

 

You know an opinion on the merits of a manager or how you rate them is largely subjective,  as is everything in football judgement really.   And i recognise my opinion on Lambert is in a minority of probably 1 on here.  But I still hold it.  Little and Taylor MK1 come close but I still think given the circumstances of the time,  where we were / are as a club at the time of appointment,  what strategy the managers were asked to work towards bearing all that and more in mind I rate Paul above the others.

 

Sure it may not work and sure he may leave the club in the near future I accept that.  But I truly believe given the circumstances some of the others had he would have out performed them and given where we were as a club and what was happening to us at the time he was appointed I am not sure any of the others could have done better or that there were other managers we could have got that could have done better

I'm not sure how you've judged Lambert compared to others and TBF it's hard to make a fair comparison as things have changed dramatically in finances and circumstance but for me regrardless of finishing position or trophies the biggest thing against Lambert is that it's not enjoyable watching Villa at the minute. It's been this way since McLeish boring negative football more concerned about not conceding than winning. Taylor Mk1 didn't play lovely football but it was attacking football the same goes for ONeill. In the 90's we played some good stuff. If we were losing playing good football and the players just weren't good enough most would even though not happy would understand but we have decent players yet the footballs atrocious. Our squad is as good as Swansea yet look at the differnce in style? Lambert has broken record after record all of them negative and unbelievably he's making McLeish look like an attacking manager!! For me he's starting to shade McLeish as the worst manager in the last 20 odd years.

[Villarocker]

Lambert has overseen the breaking of so many of our "bad" records that someone ought to call Guiness Book Of Records and invite them to Villa Park to induct him into their Hall of fame.

[DCJonah]

He's taken over McLeish for me, because the awful football has gone on for much longer.