The Rémi Garde thread

[New_Jersey_Villa]

3 minutes ago, Neil said:

We only spend 52 milliion, because we sold Benteke...is more the point.  Who are we going to sell to raise that again?

There is another discussion about FFP, I'm not even sure we can spend much more without making sales.  Who is there to sell.

The money we've actually spent that wasn't raised through sales has been one of the lowest in the prem for some time*, kind of where we are in the league reflects that.  Actual investment of surplus isn't coming, I am pretty certain of that, many other clubs are making bigger "net spend"* than us and our budget is shoe string by comparison.


*Based on a table I'm sure I remember seeing where net spend compared with other teams was plotted, and shown ours to be low.

I recall seeing the table you are talking about. At least he allowed that money to be reinvested in the team though, as opposed to pocketing the cash. I guess the biggest irony is that if we'd spent no money at all this summer we'd still be in exactly the same position in the league as we are after spending 50 million. 50 mill doesn't get you what it used to I guess.

[Zatman]

1 hour ago, jon_c said:

My only problem with that video is the fickle black and white nature of booing everyone, but clapping Gil because he scored. 

Like that's the only way a player can be good or bad. 

its how Niall Quinn awards his Man of the Match award on Sky

Edited January 5, 2016 by Zatman

[Neil]

2 minutes ago, New_Jersey_Villa said:

I recall seeing the table you are talking about. At least he allowed that money to be reinvested in the team though, as opposed to pocketing the cash. I guess the biggest irony is that if we'd spent no money at all this summer we'd still be in exactly the same position in the league as we are after spending 50 million. 50 mill doesn't get you what it used to I guess.

I would like to preface the following with "I have ziltch sympathy for Randy Lerner, he deserves everything he gets it's just a shame he's dragging us down with him".

Alas, I think he's between very much a rock and a hard place.  I think he realises he would have had to allow that money to be reinvested, because his investment was at stake and taking any money out is likely to hurt him even more financially.  

I believe now, this proposition isn't even on the table.  He's probably been briefed that relegation is likely, and he'll want as much financial damage limitation as possible - which won't include pumping any further funds.  I guess his two options are go flat out trying to stay up, or batten down the hatches and ride through the storm.  The 2nd option requires no further input or crucially investment from him, the first would be gambling hugely.

That's how I see it, at least.

You're probably right in hindsight.  We lost our main goal outlet, crucial goals that kept us in the league...I always believed (still do) that with such a poor team around him we could make a better team with his money (and without Benteke).  It hasn't worked out like that, and now we have no one else to sell to give that idea another go.

With no-one left to sell, having to prepare for the championship and FFP a consideration I believe the shoe string budget will be back in full effect.

 

[DeadlyDirk]

1 hour ago, Neil said:

I would like to preface the following with "I have ziltch sympathy for Randy Lerner, he deserves everything he gets it's just a shame he's dragging us down with him".

Alas, I think he's between very much a rock and a hard place.  I think he realises he would have had to allow that money to be reinvested, because his investment was at stake and taking any money out is likely to hurt him even more financially.  

I believe now, this proposition isn't even on the table.  He's probably been briefed that relegation is likely, and he'll want as much financial damage limitation as possible - which won't include pumping any further funds.  I guess his two options are go flat out trying to stay up, or batten down the hatches and ride through the storm.  The 2nd option requires no further input or crucially investment from him, the first would be gambling hugely.

That's how I see it, at least.

You're probably right in hindsight.  We lost our main goal outlet, crucial goals that kept us in the league...I always believed (still do) that with such a poor team around him we could make a better team with his money (and without Benteke).  It hasn't worked out like that, and now we have no one else to sell to give that idea another go.

With no-one left to sell, having to prepare for the championship and FFP a consideration I believe the shoe string budget will be back in full effect.

 

Judging by those two options then, I can see him going for the option of battening down the hatches. Randy's absence.. Just how damaging is it? Well, let's see, in the workplace, when the boss is away and not making people accountable for poor performance, what normally happens? Productivity falls, people take the proverbial. That's exactly waht's happening at Villa in my book. The summer transfers seemed to be carried out without a plan, other than to buy young and profitable players.

Anyway, it's the Remi Garde thread so a word on him, I like him, although I would have been much more comfortable with an experienced head came in, and not a Pearson or someone of his ilk. I think long term, with Remi we'll be fine, even when we do go down. He's already shown that he doesn't suffer fools gladly, I think the squad will be in for a shock next season as well. I think we'll lose Gana, Ayew and Richards in the summer, he'll manage to persuade Veretout, Gil and Traore to stay, but if we don't get instant promotion they'll be gone the following year. Either way, it's heartbreaking but now I'm becoming intrigued to see how we'll do in the 2nd tier.

[piav_k4]

4 hours ago, Stevo985 said:

We spent a lot, but I was referring to our general spending over the past few seasons, which hasn't been enough.

Over the last few years we've made a loss or a token small profit, therefore we couldn't have spent any more.

The problem must be how it's spent, not how much.

[Grasshopper]

On 3. Januar 2016 at 16:58, VillaChris said:

Very true.

It's the hate Sherwood gets compared to Paul Lambert that I don't get.

Paul Lambert presided over some of the most embarrassing results in our history. 

I respected both for doing certain things

but hate them both

lambert for holding out for his payoff bringing the club to the brink

sherwood for deliberately taking us to the bottom of the league to proof all above him are wrong to hide is shortcomings as a manager

the quicker we nosedived - the quicker he got his payoff so that he could F**k off back to "Laaaandan""

[Zatman]

the reason I hate Lambert is he did something that no other manager ever did and that was make me not care about Villa. Was games last season I wouldnt watch as I knew we wouldnt even try to score

 

[Sam3773]

Obviously Guardiola is coming then.

I don't condone sacking Remi this soon but hopefully Pep can get a result this season. Might be smart thinking from Rudolph.

[jon_c]

Nah, he's a chequebook manager.

[bobzy]

1 hour ago, Zatman said:

the reason I hate Lambert is he did something that no other manager ever did and that was make me not care about Villa. Was games last season I wouldnt watch as I knew we wouldnt even try to score

 

I find it bizarre that people actively hate others who have tried to succeed at our club.  Lambert's failing was that he ended up not being good enough.  What a terrible person, eh?  Hate.  Unreal.

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, piav_k4 said:

Over the last few years we've made a loss or a token small profit, therefore we couldn't have spent any more.

The problem must be how it's spent, not how much.

I'm not debating who's fault it is, whether we COULD have spent more or any of that.

We haven't spent enough. Our net spend is something like £6m per season on average.

That is not enough to stay in the Premier League. If we can't spend any more because of FFP then we need to find a solution to that as we're not spending enough.

[YLN]

I think hate in this context is similar to that you might have for a flavour of icecream or a brand of car. I don't think many people actually hate Paul Lambert, in the way that the Jews might have hated Hitler.

[bobzy]

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I'm not debating who's fault it is, whether we COULD have spent more or any of that.

We haven't spent enough. Our net spend is something like £6m per season on average.

That is not enough to stay in the Premier League. If we can't spend any more because of FFP then we need to find a solution to that as we're not spending enough.

Net spend is irrelevant, but we don't need to go there again.

[Stevo985]

2 minutes ago, bobzy said:

Net spend is irrelevant, but we don't need to go there again.

Not over a significant period of time it isn't.

If you're isolating it to one season then I totally agree. 

I also agree with the point that wages are more important, but we've slashed them as well.

 

I don't think the cost cutting has been unnecessary as it was clear we couldn't sustain ourselves after MON. 

But I'd argue whether it had to be so drastic, and also that it's that (along with questionable business actions) that has caused this.

Edited January 5, 2016 by Stevo985

[piav_k4]

4 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I'm not debating who's fault it is, whether we COULD have spent more or any of that.

We haven't spent enough. Our net spend is something like £6m per season on average.

That is not enough to stay in the Premier League. If we can't spend any more because of FFP then we need to find a solution to that as we're not spending enough.

You've alluded to it in your next post but wages have choked us in recent years.

In fairness, Tom Fox realises that to spend more you need to make more.

That was the strategy in the summer (moneyball) but it just hasn't worked. The players signed are all talented enough. Stats can't show you everything I guess.

[HeyAnty]

35 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

I'm not debating who's fault it is, whether we COULD have spent more or any of that.

We haven't spent enough. Our net spend is something like £6m per season on average.

That is not enough to stay in the Premier League. If we can't spend any more because of FFP then we need to find a solution to that as we're not spending enough.

Think Fox is trying to do that regards FFP and these shirt deals he is talking about etc.  Paul Faulkner might have been the worst man at the club when you think about it, if we havent been able to increase turnover all these year.

[mwj]

16 minutes ago, HeyAnty said:

Think Fox is trying to do that regards FFP and these shirt deals he is talking about etc.  Paul Faulkner might have been the worst man at the club when you think about it, if we havent been able to increase turnover all these year.

Faulkner (and Sherwood more latterly) are the root causes in my opinion

18 months is not enough time for a CEO to turn a medium-sized enterprise around IMO, especially when it had been run hopelessly by Lerner, Faulkner and co for 8+ years previous to that

Edited January 5, 2016 by mwj

[Neil]

1 hour ago, bobzy said:

Net spend is irrelevant, but we don't need to go there again.

Not if you constantly churn out players you can sell for a lot more than you've paid for them, and then replace with of suitable quality.

If you've nothing left to sell, then the net spend...or external investment is everything.

[ermie123]

2 hours ago, YLN said:

I think hate in this context is similar to that you might have for a flavour of icecream or a brand of car. I don't think many people actually hate Paul Lambert, in the way that the Jews might have hated Hitler.

Hate is a pointless emotion.

[New_Jersey_Villa]

If we'd spent more we might be no better off anyway. Considering some of the poor choices that were made on players with the money we did spend, who's to say that the players signed if extra money were made available would be any good either?