Steven Hollis

[TRO]

22 hours ago, VillaCas said:

No-one thinks "money alone will fix this". Clearly you need to find the right players and bring them in. Literally everyone is agreed on this

Judging by the attempts Blandy is having......I would refute that everyone knows that.

I only see arguments for more money on here......not the right players for the club.

yes there is a link, but they are NOT the same argument.

 

Edited January 26, 2016 by TRO

[TRO]

18 hours ago, terrytini said:

 

And I still say, that Hollis HAS identified not spending money almost as if spending caused the problems, 

A good post Terry and many things I agree with, BUT

The above line is not what I understood to be the intention.

My understanding is that in their( Lerner/Hollis) belief they have thrown too much money at duds and it cannot be sustained, until there is evidence that any new money will be well spent wisely......what comes first the chicken or the egg ,I hear you say....But no one can keep up the level of poor signings we have.....some thing has to change.

I hear some say, all clubs do that, sign duds......not at the ratio to decent players we have in the last ten years.....I just don't buy that, Perhaps Sunderland have or one or 2 exceptions like us.

I believe what he is trying to say is when the infrastructure as he puts it is in place and we are happy with it....then we resume the plan for investment only this time we are EXPECTING to sign good players that will contribute to the task of getting Villa back to decency.

How they do it is their call.

The only exception to this IMO is to get a new owner who has not squandered millions of pounds, has not burnt his fingers and had his head reluctantly turned to austerity, has not experienced any financial damage due in the main to bad buys.....and can feel free to try his hand at the business of trying to build a football team.

I can understand fully the attraction of a new owner.....I just wonder if we don't get another bunch of problems that equate to the same thing.....but hey lets roll the dice.

Edited January 26, 2016 by TRO

[VillaCas]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

Judging by the attempts Blandy is having......I would refute that everyone knows that.

I only see arguments for more money on here......not the right players for the club.

yes there is a link, but they are NOT the same argument.

Yes there is an argument going on around what is the correct level of investment required for us to achieve say, mid-table mediocrity.  Some would say that we have had enough investment to ensure this, others are saying that we should have had more.  My view is that the level of investment overall has been ok but that we have had periods spending lots and then periods spending little and it is this stuttering application of funds that is a major cause of our problem (but NOT the only cause)

You seem to be saying that people are calling for large amounts to be spent almost randomly without worrying about who we are buying - I've seen literally no-one proposing this. 

One thing I do know is that if we had spent a small amount on 1st January on a striker (£4m for Charlie Austin say) we could easily have half a dozen more points and be right in the mix instead of ten points adrift. Very short-sighted from Mr Hollis

 

Edited January 26, 2016 by VillaCas

[VillaCas]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

I believe what he is trying to say is when the infrastructure as he puts it is in place and we are happy with it....then we resume the plan for investment only this time we are EXPECTING to sign good players that will contribute to the task of getting Villa back to decency.

What expertise are you imagining Hollis is bringing to the table to ensure that we sign good players?

It seems to me that the latest infrastructure (that already exists) can identify good players already - Gil, Ayew, Amavi, Veretout, Gana, Traore all seem "good players" to me? Gestede, Bunn, Lescott, Sinclair and Richards are "mooted" to have been Sherwood's choices. Iiori and Crespo were duds but didn't break the bank. We don't need a structural review, we can sign decent players already

I think you're falling hook, line and sinker for Hollis' spin - he's been told to slash costs and his first crack at placating the fans is the famous "conduct a full review" gambit. 

[Richard]

35 minutes ago, VillaCas said:

What expertise are you imagining Hollis is bringing to the table to ensure that we sign good players?

It seems to me that the latest infrastructure (that already exists) can identify good players already - Gil, Ayew, Amavi, Veretout, Gana, Traore all seem "good players" to me? Gestede, Bunn, Lescott, Sinclair and Richards are "mooted" to have been Sherwood's choices. Iiori and Crespo were duds but didn't break the bank. We don't need a structural review, we can sign decent players already

I think you're falling hook, line and sinker for Hollis' spin - he's been told to slash costs and his first crack at placating the fans is the famous "conduct a full review" gambit. 

Top post

Typical consultant language being used "process re-engineering" "business rationalisation" "continuous improvement".  Basically to justify an existence .

[Grasshopper]

I wrote on here (cant find it on my iphone/mobile version) that  the £50mill or so million we spent in the summer was relatively successful (£-value ratio) we just needed to spend another £50mill on

GK

RB

CD

DM

RW

LW

CF

SH is delusional if he thinks cutting back is in any way going to help

now that were heading towards the Championship we'll still need

a GK RB CD DM RW LW CF

that'll cost at least £30mill, plus what we have, to come straight back up.

wow SH has already saved us £20mill 

[Rds1983]

51 minutes ago, VillaCas said:

What expertise are you imagining Hollis is bringing to the table to ensure that we sign good players?

It seems to me that the latest infrastructure (that already exists) can identify good players already - Gil, Ayew, Amavi, Veretout, Gana, Traore all seem "good players" to me? Gestede, Bunn, Lescott, Sinclair and Richards are "mooted" to have been Sherwood's choices. Iiori and Crespo were duds but didn't break the bank. We don't need a structural review, we can sign decent players already

I think you're falling hook, line and sinker for Hollis' spin - he's been told to slash costs and his first crack at placating the fans is the famous "conduct a full review" gambit. 

Sinclair was signed (on loan) before Sherwood became manager.

[VillaCas]

32 minutes ago, Rds1983 said:

Sinclair was signed (on loan) before Sherwood became manager.

Yes but I understand it was Sherwood's decision to make the loan permanent

[HanoiVillan]

7 minutes ago, VillaCas said:

Yes but I understand it was Sherwood's decision to make the loan permanent

I thought it was a clause in his loan agreement? We stay up, we buy him. 

[VillaCas]

5 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I thought it was a clause in his loan agreement? We stay up, we buy him. 

Maybe? I heard that we had the option. Whatever. Many don't like him but I think at £2.5m(?) it's not the worst deal in the world. I'm no big fan but I think in a more confident side he would be a lot better (wouldnt they all)

[HanoiVillan]

I think he's trash and a large part of the reason we are where we are, but this is a debate for another thread. 

[VillaCas]

4 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think he's trash and a large part of the reason we are where we are, but this is a debate for another thread. 

I'm not a big fan as I say. I think he was ok last season but rubbish this - on last seasons form I'd keep him as a squad player on this seasons I'd be happy to see him go

A large part of the reason we are where we are? No, not for me

[PussEKatt]

I wonder if Hollis realises how much we could save if we went streight down to league 2 ?!

The cost cutting and money saving would be enormus,I mean just think.We could slash our transfer spending by about 50%/60%.We could cut our wage bill by about 80%.

The club shop could save on stock,they would not need to buy as much stock as we would sell less.We could even save on maintenance at VP.We could cordon off 25% of VP as we would only get around 10000/12000.

I think he has worked out that we can save just by going down to the championship but has he worked out how much more we could save by going down even further ? perhaps we could come to an agreement with the FA so that at the end of this season we can go streight to league 1 and start the real cost cutting. 

[blandy]

4 hours ago, TRO said:

...My understanding is that in their( Lerner / Hollis ) belief they have thrown too much money at duds and it cannot be sustained, until there is evidence that any new money will be well spent wisely......what comes first the chicken or the egg ,I hear you say....But no one can keep up the level of poor signings we have.....some thing has to change......

I believe what he is trying to say is when the infrastructure as he puts it is in place and we are happy with it....then we resume the plan for investment only this time we are EXPECTING to sign good players that will contribute to the task of getting Villa back to decency.

How they do it is their call.....

I think it's almost certainly Randy Lerner's view that he has put a ton of cash into signings, wage bills and all the rest, and that the club has not performed commensurately. And he's right. And he's decided enough is enough (which is a shame, because as others have said Remi Garde genuinely appears to know what he's doing, and maybe a Charlie Austin type would have given us a better chance of staying up).

The difficulty I have with Hollis saying this, is that I'm not sure that it's really his own thought, more what RL has told him, relayed through some business babble. Furthermore, there's the thing about "putting infrastructure in place" before doing more signings. This is kind of drivel, really. You could take the view that the current system picked a bunch of players that cost 50 million quid nearly, and while many are now in the team, the team is crap. Ergo the plan and execution and infrastructure was wrong (I pretty much take that view). But the infrastructure was Sherwood, that Halmstad bloke, Paddy Reilly and Fox. Sherwood's gone (and he gives the impression of not really being that keen on the signings). The others are still here. So is Hollis going to get rid of them/sideline them? Or is it more of an excuse, actually. Does he really think, "stuff it, we're down, we have to comply with FFP with reduced income, we can't spend now because of the longer term harm it'll do. Better to wait till the summer, see exactly what the finances are, and then spend whatever we can." I think he might think that. But he dare not say it.

I don't think they'll change the infrastructure, I think they're just operating under limited availability of money, likely drops in income, and Championship FFP constraints about to hit.

[1974Centenary]

1 hour ago, HanoiVillan said:

I think he's trash and a large part of the reason we are where we are, but this is a debate for another thread. 

Villas top scorer and hes the reason we are were we are,utter nonsense.

[HanoiVillan]

He's our 'top scorer' because he scored a hat-trick in a League Cup tie against League Two opposition. Apart from that game (in which he still missed countless chances and was easily shouldered off the ball) he has played moderately well on one occasion (Sunderland at home) and been garbage in every other fixture. He clearly barely tries, is weak and constantly surrenders possession to the opposition. He's crap. 

[VillaCas]

49 minutes ago, blandy said:

I think it's almost certainly Randy Lerner's view that he has put a ton of cash into signings, wage bills and all the rest, and that the club has not performed commensurately. And he's right. And he's decided enough is enough (which is a shame, because as others have said Remi Garde genuinely appears to know what he's doing, and maybe a Charlie Austin type would have given us a better chance of staying up).

The difficulty I have with Hollis saying this, is that I'm not sure that it's really his own thought, more what RL has told him, relayed through some business babble. Furthermore, there's the thing about "putting infrastructure in place" before doing more signings. This is kind of drivel, really. You could take the view that the current system picked a bunch of players that cost 50 million quid nearly, and while many are now in the team, the team is crap. Ergo the plan and execution and infrastructure was wrong (I pretty much take that view). But the infrastructure was Sherwood, that Halmstad bloke, Paddy Reilly and Fox. Sherwood's gone (and he gives the impression of not really being that keen on the signings). The others are still here. So is Hollis going to get rid of them/sideline them? Or is it more of an excuse, actually. Does he really think, "stuff it, we're down, we have to comply with FFP with reduced income, we can't spend now because of the longer term harm it'll do. Better to wait till the summer, see exactly what the finances are, and then spend whatever we can." I think he might think that. But he dare not say it.

I don't think they'll change the infrastructure, I think they're just operating under limited availability of money, likely drops in income, and Championship FFP constraints about to hit.

This is spot on for me

I suspect that Hollis knows very little about football and even less about Villa.  Everything he thinks is what Lerner has told him to think.

He is on record as believing that the current crop of signings are the cause of our woes. If this were to be true (it's not) then the only route open is to replace one, two or three of the transfer committee.  I guarantee that he won't be doing this.  What will he be doing? Nothing! Sacking a few groundsmen and tea ladies and pulling the plug on spending for a while.

Hollis is playing the "full review" card because he thinks that we are daft enough to believe it - whilst he might fool one or two, the vast majority has seen through his ham-fisted spin

Edited January 26, 2016 by VillaCas

[VillaCas]

Do you think Hollis reads this thread. He seems like exactly the sort of bloke who would google himself.

I do hope so!!

[foreveryoung]

To me he has said nothing, which gives me hope for this football club. If it were marks & sparks (which he would probably suit better) I would feel the positive. What we need to remember is, this running a football club is far more than running a business. Him talking about the infrastructure, just bores me and i'm guessing most of the fans to death, We go watch football, we want to watch winning football, Hollis how you gonna do that. Please go sort the infrastructure, but don't frackin bore, or bother me about it, I am only interested in what goes on with the team and how they can perform on that pitch.

Its business babble bullshit, that we can't spend money because the infrastructure is not good. I still believe the backroom staff can pick a player, its just we need to speculate to accumulate, to get us out the shit, an its just blatently obvious the board just don't wanna spend money. They are settled for us going down, an are trying to fill us fans with bullshit excuses for it.

[HanoiVillan]

3 minutes ago, foreveryoung said:

To me he has said nothing, which gives me hope for this football club.

The way you've positioned the comma in this sentence gives it the exact opposite meaning to the one I think (?) you intended.