Top of the Flops: Mcleish, Houllier Or DOL?

[CBGB]

Love that some folk want to include MON. Amazing, really.

[Moorski]

Mc Leish but Houllier is not far behind him,O'Leary a very close 3rd!

[LeafyVilla]

O'Leary I really didn't mind and I thought he done the best he could, like already mentioned I think Houllier could have been ok for us, as for McDick what an absolute disaster right from the start to the bitter end, hopefully the board/club will never ever sink that low again because last season was just horrid.

[briny_ear]

Love that some folk want to include MON. Amazing, really.

It was tediously predictable that MON would crop up eventually. He seems to make an appearance in every thread given time!

It would be interesting to put it to the test - start a fresh thread asking the same question with MON alongside O'Leary, Houllier and McLeish and see exactly how many people would actually rate him as the biggest "flop" out of those four.

[Woody1000]

To say that MON was a flop is ridiculous.

Sure, he had more money available to him than the other 3 managers mentioned in this thread, but then I think he achieved relative success in his time here. Decent cup runs, and top 6 finishes - I hope PL 'flops' like that!

Of course we were left with rather inflated wage bill once he left, but you cannot compare the guy to McLeish or DOL, or even GH for what he achieved in his 4 years at the club.

[P3te]

To say that MON was a flop is ridiculous.

Sure, he had more money available to him than the other 3 managers mentioned in this thread, but then I think he achieved relative success in his time here. Decent cup runs, and top 6 finishes - I hope PL 'flops' like that!

Of course we were left with rather inflated wage bill once he left, but you cannot compare the guy to McLeish or DOL, or even GH for what he achieved in his 4 years at the club.

he wasn't a flop, but he also didn't do anything of any note. given the money he had to spend he did the bare acceptable minimum

[TRO]

As Statler & Waldorf say " who cares"

[CI]

That's a ridiculous statement Woodytom

For the money spent, the "legacy" he left & the way he left, MON was a massive flop and disappointment

He was given ample resource to win trophies and get into the CL

He failed on both counts, fact.

[TRO]

To say that MON was a flop is ridiculous.

Sure, he had more money available to him than the other 3 managers mentioned in this thread, but then I think he achieved relative success in his time here. Decent cup runs, and top 6 finishes - I hope PL 'flops' like that!

Of course we were left with rather inflated wage bill once he left, but you cannot compare the guy to McLeish or DOL, or even GH for what he achieved in his 4 years at the club.

he wasn't a flop, but he also didn't do anything of any note. given the money he had to spend he did the bare acceptable minimum

surrounded by so many poor performing managers we have had, it is inevitable he looked Good.

MON wasn't a bad manager far from it... He had very good parts to his portfolio and not so good parts.I too think he lefts us a bit of a legacy in overpaid under performing players.... but hey no where near in comparison to the last 2 (however it could be another debate as to how that legacy affected the last 2)

One thing Mon did .... give us back some pride & hope.

[legov]

Can't believe the answer to this question is even a debate.

[P3te]

One thing Mon did .... give us back some pride & hope.

only temporarily. the financial hole he helped create played as big a part in the failure of what happened next than the individual managers who followed him imo

would we have hired mcleish had our finances been secure? not a chance

[TRO]

One thing Mon did .... give us back some pride & hope.

only temporarily. the financial hole he helped create played as big a part in the failure of what happened next than the individual managers who followed him imo

would we have hired mcleish had our finances been secure? not a chance

Pete,I think your point has sound foundations.

[briny_ear]

would we have hired mcleish had our finances been secure? not a chance

The argument that Alex McLeish was the only manager we could have hired because of our financial position in 2011 is so astounding it has temporarily removed my powers of thought.

It is just so far from reality.

[P3te]

would we have hired mcleish had our finances been secure? not a chance

The argument that Alex McLeish was the only manager we could have hired because of our financial position in 2011 is so astounding it has temporarily removed my powers of thought.

It is just so far from reality.

where did i say that?

what i said was, do you think mcleish would have become our manager if we werent in the financial hole we were in?

of course he wouldnt

he wasnt the only manager we couldve hired, but he was a damn good choice if you were looking for someone to attract the fans ire while necessary restructuring of finances took place. relatively cheap, from our rivals, willing to take whatever crap the board gave him. i think the ultimate issue was that they didn't think even he could do that bad. they likely had him pegged for a 11-14th place finish while the decks were cleared. he was an easy option for them, because of the financial state of the club

[briny_ear]

he wasnt the only manager we couldve hired, but he was a damn good choice if you were looking for someone to attract the fans ire while necessary restructuring of finances took place. relatively cheap, from our rivals, willing to take whatever crap the board gave him. i think the ultimate issue was that they didn't think even he could do that bad. they likely had him pegged for a 11-14th place finish while the decks were cleared. he was an easy option for them, because of the financial state of the club

He was a terrible choice of manager because (a) he had a pretty poor track record in the Premier League ( it was clear the Villa fans despised him. His appointment in itself must have had a measurable downward affect on attendances (=income). Lerner had to pay compensation to get him in, signed him up to a 3-year, £2m contract and then had to pay compensation to get him out. McLeish did not do much to sort out the financial position at all. How many of our much maligned average/poor quality, highly paid, players did he actually ship out? He stuck with Collins, Dunne and Warnock and actually paid to get in a further dodgy defender, Hutton. It is Lambert who is now starting to sort this out.

What you argue above just looks like rationalisation of a series of blunders. Having miscalculated the financial position of the club, Lerner then mishandled the departure of Martin O'Neill and mishandled two subsequent managerial appointments. Thankfully he has now got one right and we can look forward with a bit more confidence but if he had appointed someone more sensible in 2010 we wouldn't have got into the state we are now in that Lambert is having to address.

[P3te]

he was a terrible choice yes, but he was an easy option as i said

the ironic thing about mcleish is that his hiring could well prove to be a major turning point in our fortunes; moreso than o'neill's hiring was. we got it wrong by giving mon so much freedom financially. we got it wrong with houllier because he had an ego and wasn't healthy. we got it wrong with mcleish because he was mcleish. that left us in the position where we needed to get it right or we were going to be in serious trouble. the sacking of mcleish and the hiring of lambert has coincided with us having relative financial stability for the first time. we're almost rid of all of mon's overpaid signings. we finally seem to be realising that there's much better value to be had abroad. we're finally realising that you don't need to get players with premier league experience on relatively pricey contracts. we've got a decent crop of youth coming through.

no doubt mcleish was a massive **** up, because the board wanted an easy option. it didnt work. it failed miserably in fact - but it could ultimately prove to be the catalyst for something better than we've seen for a long while.

it's all about the money these days, and if lambert proves to be as shrewd as he looks, i think we'll have to give perverse thanks to a series of almost catastrophic errors for the turnaround in fortunes on and off the pitch

i disagree that appointing someone different post mon wouldve made much difference. short term, perhaps, but ultimately we'd have had to go through the same austerity measures as we've seen in the last 18 months - it could very easily have been much worse if left any longer too. obviously that's nobody's fault but the board's, but it may just have been the shot of realism we needed to do things properly

[Mantis]

he wasnt the only manager we couldve hired, but he was a damn good choice if you were looking for someone to attract the fans ire while necessary restructuring of finances took place. relatively cheap, from our rivals, willing to take whatever crap the board gave him. i think the ultimate issue was that they didn't think even he could do that bad. they likely had him pegged for a 11-14th place finish while the decks were cleared. he was an easy option for them, because of the financial state of the club

He was a terrible choice of manager because (a) he had a pretty poor track record in the Premier League ( it was clear the Villa fans despised him. His appointment in itself must have had a measurable downward affect on attendances (=income). Lerner had to pay compensation to get him in, signed him up to a 3-year, £2m contract and then had to pay compensation to get him out. McLeish did not do much to sort out the financial position at all. How many of our much maligned average/poor quality, highly paid, players did he actually ship out? He stuck with Collins, Dunne and Warnock and actually paid to get in a further dodgy defender, Hutton. It is Lambert who is now starting to sort this out.

What you argue above just looks like rationalisation of a series of blunders. Having miscalculated the financial position of the club, Lerner then mishandled the departure of Martin O'Neill and mishandled two subsequent managerial appointments. Thankfully he has now got one right and we can look forward with a bit more confidence but if he had appointed someone more sensible in 2010 we wouldn't have got into the state we are now in that Lambert is having to address.

While I agree with you on most here, I don't know how you can say "thankfully he's got this one right". Way too early to say that. The signs are promising but let's wait and see how we do results wise when the season starts.

[Papillon]

When we had MON we as fans believed we could win every game at home, and we knew we had a good chance away as well. We won against United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. In one of the seasons we scored over 70 goals and we genuinely played some nice stuff. To say he was a flop is extremely ignorant, because we have quickly seen afterwards what can happen in a short period of time. It is difficult to challenge when you are a 6-10th club like us, it takes a lot of money, but it is not like our wage bill was that bad. Besides, he does not secure the contracts and he does not sign the wage bill. Negotiations are left with the CFO and obviously he spilled money around on many of the mediocre players. MON was a relative success and he brought joy to the fans, something that has been absent for large parts of my 20 years of being a fan.

[commander]

To say that MON was a flop is ridiculous.

Sure, he had more money available to him than the other 3 managers mentioned in this thread, but then I think he achieved relative success in his time here. Decent cup runs, and top 6 finishes - I hope PL 'flops' like that!

Of course we were left with rather inflated wage bill once he left, but you cannot compare the guy to McLeish or DOL, or even GH for what he achieved in his 4 years at the club.

we're not suggesting he's a flop - but he's done far more damage to the club than any of teh others did. £20m wages to £80m under his tenure. When he left we had the 13th highest average wages of any club in the world - that's completely scandalous

[commander]

When we had MON we as fans believed we could win every game at home, and we knew we had a good chance away as well. We won against United, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool etc. In one of the seasons we scored over 70 goals and we genuinely played some nice stuff. To say he was a flop is extremely ignorant, because we have quickly seen afterwards what can happen in a short period of time. It is difficult to challenge when you are a 6-10th club like us, it takes a lot of money, but it is not like our wage bill was that bad. Besides, he does not secure the contracts and he does not sign the wage bill. Negotiations are left with the CFO and obviously he spilled money around on many of the mediocre players. MON was a relative success and he brought joy to the fans, something that has been absent for large parts of my 20 years of being a fan.

The 13th highest average wage bill of any football club in the world? You don't think that's bad?

It went from £20m when he joined to £80m when he left. Again, it IS that bad - it's scandalous.

i'll give you away form but our home form was tripe (taking into account money spent etc) did we win more than half in the league in any season uinder him? I think we may have won 10 once during his tenure, hardly inspiring is it?