sne Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 (edited) I know we are one of the oldest clubs in the world, but does that also mean we have become the football equivalent of the senior citizens who cut out cupons in the paper and only buy things that are on discount? Value for money is all good, but it can't become the only thing we look for or more important than quality Edited January 4, 2013 by sne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 How then do you propose we pay for his replacement in 3-4 years when he leaves? Money from finishing higher in the league. Improved money through sponsorship, merchandise sales and other avenues when your team is performing better. Do we not have the 7th highest income in the league? There really should be only a handful of clubs that can easily out spend us. We seem to have accepted Lerner's lack of spending as some sort of realistic place where this club should be. We couldn't continue the spending under MoN but signing the odd player like Lescott and replacing them a few years later shouldn't be a massive issue for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I know we are one of the oldest clubs in the world, but that also mean we have become the football equivalent of the senior citizens who cut out cupons in the paper and only buy things that are on discount? Value for money is all good, but it can't become the only thing we look for or more important than quality Exactly and it seems to be because of Lerner. When Doug included wages when talking about how much spent he was mocked and laughed at. Now we don't want a player if it might cost Lerner a bit on wages. Now we seem to really care about these extra costs when defending the amount of backing the manager gets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie09 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 We are a big club. True we have had a shite few years but never the less we are a big English club. Of course we could attract the like of Lescott. he doesnt seem like a Lambert style signing to me so I doubt it will happen but we should not put ourselves down. Aston Villa are a big club, this relegation battling shite is temporary. We will rise again and it will be a sweet time. This. Too many people are too quick to talk our fine club down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JulieB Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Pat Murphy - understands no chance of Lescott joining Villa because Lerner & Lambert haven't even discussed him joining - prefer permanent to loans. Wouldn't be first time Lambert has thrown the press a fish to feed on - a red herring or two so the feeding frenzy can take place leaving the club to do business quietly without other clubs knowing what's going on. Like someone said this morning - Defoe & Kenwyne Jones! No idea IF Lescott was a red herring of course but Pat Murphy normally has an inkling what's going on at B6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamsonwoodVillan Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Bit of a frustrating couple of days really with clubs like Newcastle and West Ham (clubs we ought to be competing with) making deals already. What date in Jan do you think our first signing will come in? I reckon it could be a bit of a wait yet and our first one will come in on the 11th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy1 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Bit of a frustrating couple of days really with clubs like Newcastle and West Ham (clubs we ought to be competing with) making deals already. What date in Jan do you think our first signing will come in? I reckon it could be a bit of a wait yet and our first one will come in on the 11th. Do you really want us to be making the sort of signings West Ham are making? I certainly don't Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Money from finishing higher in the league. Improved money through sponsorship, merchandise sales and other avenues when your team is performing better. Do we not have the 7th highest income in the league? There really should be only a handful of clubs that can easily out spend us. We seem to have accepted Lerner's lack of spending as some sort of realistic place where this club should be. We couldn't continue the spending under MoN but signing the odd player like Lescott and replacing them a few years later shouldn't be a massive issue for us. Not at all.it has nothing to do with ambition, and I think you know that really Look, Id say to lambert go out, find a £10m centre back if thats what you want. Pay him £60k a week if thats what he wants. Spend £20m if you like, the amount is unimportant On this condition Make as sure as you can be that during his time here he improves us as team, and himself as an individual, and we will get a resale value on him that represents value. Whats the problem with that? Surely that makes a million times more sense than throwing money away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattyp_avfc Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I reakon our first signing will come after the Ipswich game....... Just a little inkling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamsonwoodVillan Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 No I wouldn't have Cole or Chamakh but it just irritates you when other clubs seem to be moving quicker. No doubt West Ham will be guaranteed safety far earlier than us this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Yes, of course. But what have we learned form the last 20 years since we last challenged for the title? Its not about winning just the next game, or winning for a short time, its about building a team that can win in a sustainable way.. This kind of short term signing is suicidal. We cant go on spending big money on short term signings, our football club and its current state is proof positive that this strategy doesnt work. If we spend substantial sums of money, it must be on players that we wont lose out on in the long term. We just arent a big or rich enough club to be able to do that. If we carry on doing what we have been for the last 20 years we WILL go down sooner or later, sooner to be honest., it is a totally unsustainable way to run a football club. The only reason we havent gone down already by following this strategy is Randy lerner pumping in £200m, without that we'd have gone 5 years ago. We have to do something different. The post I quoted explains exactly why what we are doing now is the ONLY viable sustainable way to do it. Im not saying we shouldnt spend big money. I'm not saying we shouldn't pay big wages. Im not saying we shouldnt buy experienced players. But when we do, we have to be as certain as we can that we will get that money back. Why? So we can afford to spend the same amount of money on his replacement. Sending £10m plus wages on lescott is money down the toilet. As a club we will never see that £10m again. How then do you propose we pay for his replacement in 3-4 years when he leaves? Where will the money come from? Isnt this where we've been? isnt this why we have a team now of kids? Because for the last five years in particular we pissed all our money away on short term signings. I cant believe anyone twho has seen us play this season hinks thats any kind of strategy for our future. Surely we, of all clubs, are walking proof why that simply doesnt work. We have to do something different or we have no long term future . I think you are struggling to see the wood for trees. Here's how it works, good players win games, winning games generates money. Money used to make the team better and so on. We're not exactly signing up the 'masters' team. We''re linked with a quality experienced player in a position were crying out for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie09 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I reakon our first signing will come after the Ipswich game....... Just a little inkling I think someone posted earlier this week that any potential signings would be after the Ipswich game. I'm confident PL will come up trumps in this window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattyp_avfc Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 I think someone posted earlier this week that any potential signings would be after the Ipswich game. I'm confident PL will come up trumps in this window. Same mate I'm excited to what players we will get, if we get Lescott, great, don't think it will happen for the ££ but Lambert knows what he wants from a player and it will see us right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Exactly and it seems to be because of Lerner. When Doug included wages when talking about how much spent he was mocked and laughed at. Now we don't want a player if it might cost Lerner a bit on wages. Now we seem to really care about these extra costs when defending the amount of backing the manager gets. Slightly different, don t you think? Doug would say, we're going to spend £20m this summer with the specific intention of misleading the fans to think he meant on transfer fees. Then he'd spend £6m, and then claim he meant to include wages in the figure, sorry if he didnt make that clear. But when you are trying to rationally discuss the cost of a player, you have to include his wages, for one very simple reason. Wages are the real cost. Again, I would have thought that fans of this club would just understand that after what we've been through. Another major reason that we are where we are is stupid wage offers to the likes of Given, Dunne and a whole army of others. But look, if it doesnt suit your argument, go ahead and ignore it. Pretend we can just go out and pay any amount of wages. But really, we all know a free transfer on a 5 year contract at 60k per week costs £15m, exactly the same as a player who costs £9m in transfers on 40k a week for 3 years. If they both get sold for £10m at the end of their contracts we havent made a profit on either - they have still both cost us £5m each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PB Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 . I think you are struggling to see the wood for trees. Here's how it works, good players win games, winning games generates money. Money used to make the team better and so on. We're not exactly signing up the 'masters' team. We''re linked with a quality experienced player in a position were crying out for. But surely you can see they dont generate as much money as they cost? If they did, we'd be rolling in cash. Yeah, you can get away with the odd one if you are incredibly lucky, but I dont see the point in spending all that money on Lescott when there are similar players five or six younger that we could get for the same sort of money if we looked a bit harder. Its not like lescott is a brilliant player - yes he would improve us, of course, but is he really worth such an astronomical cost? I know he's just signed a new contract so will be going nowhere, but if we were talking about £10m or even £15m for Shawcross I'd be all over it like a rash. Five years younger, and to be honest, quite a bit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxy1 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 PB I get your point but we also have a sizeable income to pay for the ongoing wage costs so it's not imperative that there is a re-sale value at the end of the contract. The issue of sustainability is more about having a manageable cost (mainly wage) income ratio so that we can make an operating profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillanousOne Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Sebastien Squillaci anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattyp_avfc Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Sebastien Squillaci anyone? Sorry but hell no, he's terrible Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinker Posted January 4, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted January 4, 2013 Lescott on loan ain't gonna happen, hes at the end of hes career, were building for the future with a young team, sink or swim that's the way its gonna happen at the villa. As for Lerner...he don't get involved with the month to month let alone the day to day. He gives us money when PF asks, upto a limit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbie09 Posted January 4, 2013 Share Posted January 4, 2013 Sorry but hell no, he's terrible Sebastien Squillaci anyone? Good God no, dreadful player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts