smetrov Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I had a conversation with a Liverpool supporting friend of mine a few weeks ago. He reminded me that I thought Lambert was the best young manager around when we got him. He was trying to argue Rodgers was doing a better job at Liverpool. I said their remit was different. Where Rodgers had a good solid base to improve Lambert has essentially started from scratch. Not to mention Liverpools solid base + £50 million and our practically new team has cost under £20 million. Yes Rodgers team have improved in recent months, but next year will be the test just like Lambert and Villa. What Liverpool and Rodgers have quickly learned - is what I fear villa haven't:- Most of the kids coming through the academy won't be good enough Ultimately good players cost Think Rodgers spent £22m in Jan - and the young starlets have rarley been seen since around December Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 we need to be constantly building .....every window should be an opportunity for us. sensible prudent purchases adding power and strength to the line up. big money signings have never turned out to be successful for us, we need to stick to what we do best, prudent signings and develop the players in to our way.ron saunders proved to be the way, similar to what Dortmund are doing very well too. Dortmund and Bayern have proved that team work just like the '82 team is the model to try to emulate. The big thing for us is how the younger players develop, it seems they have come on quite a bit since the season started... confidence is playing a part, but as we know they can be up and down as long as the overall is up we are on the right lines. I thought the balance the other night looked better too.... but we still have a lot to do to tighten up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost_of_Pongo_Waring Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 I think it's going to be interesting to see how our defence is strengthened for next season. Lambert has a bit of a reputation for not being solid where defence is concerned. However, if we stay up, I think it will be the first time the defence he's built will be playing at the same level two seasons running. At Norwich his League One defence was playing in the Championship the following season and then the Premiership the season after. It's understandable that they'd struggle in those conditions. It may be that he's just not going to be strong defensively but maybe he'll surprise us. I certainly hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted May 1, 2013 Share Posted May 1, 2013 His record in purchases have been very good so far. I don't think we need to sign as many players as we did last summer. Its about quality not quantity. We also need to keep the current policy of giving youth a chance. So maybe 2 or 3 quality signing in the summer, 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid. There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. That maybe so. Thats why I have often questioned where 'getting rid of the high earners' ends ? - I fear it will be ongoing - regardless of what happens on the pitch. The size of the wage bill is of more interest to Lerner than our position in the league. Depends what you mean by High earners ? - I don't mean we have to pay Samba £100k a week or anything daft. But at the other extreme, A league 1 player on 10k a week, tossed in with a academy kids on even less - well its not going to cut it much above where we are now. Olson from WBA is the sort of CB we should be looking at - and able to afford. However I see nothing to suggest we are going to be looking at players of that caliber. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the table Haven't they gone on record and said they want the wage to turnover no higher than 60%? I assume we won't have to get rid of anyone once that figure has been reached, which should be this summer, in fact some figures on here suggest that if we get rid of everyone we want we'll be below 50% and therefore have plenty of wriggle room to bring new players in. I really hope Lambert can continue to be a bit more imaginative in his spending than signing a CB from one of our local rivals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dante_Lockhart Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 I would say that now we have 'cleared the books' so to speak and got the wage bill under some sort of control, that in the summer we will have money to spend to get new players in. No doubt. The issue we had was having bench warmers earning 35k + a week, some even 50k +. It's good business, you don't get more people in when you have people earning a load of money doing the same thing. I'm highly optimistic that our side will only get better over the summer. Especially if Lambert can get more players in like Vlaar and Benteke. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid. There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. That maybe so. Thats why I have often questioned where 'getting rid of the high earners' ends ? - I fear it will be ongoing - regardless of what happens on the pitch. The size of the wage bill is of more interest to Lerner than our position in the league. Depends what you mean by High earners ? - I don't mean we have to pay Samba £100k a week or anything daft. But at the other extreme, A league 1 player on 10k a week, tossed in with a academy kids on even less - well its not going to cut it much above where we are now. Olson from WBA is the sort of CB we should be looking at - and able to afford. However I see nothing to suggest we are going to be looking at players of that caliber. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the table Haven't they gone on record and said they want the wage to turnover no higher than 60%? I assume we won't have to get rid of anyone once that figure has been reached, which should be this summer, in fact some figures on here suggest that if we get rid of everyone we want we'll be below 50% and therefore have plenty of wriggle room to bring new players in. I really hope Lambert can continue to be a bit more imaginative in his spending than signing a CB from one of our local rivals. I hope your right, but "they" have said a lot of things. They said they would run this club as a company, they said there was a 5-year plan, they said the aim was the Champions League, then they said the goal was europe, they said Barry, Young, Milner and Downing would stay, then it was to be sustainiable, lower the wages and get rid of the high earners... What's to say it stops there? Frankly i don't have a lot of faith in what "they" say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 I've been more impressed with Lambert recently and more hopeful for the future. I'm starting to go back to how I felt about him at the start of the season. But for me a remarkable season doesn't include worst ever premiership start, most amount of goals conceded for around 27 years, losing to Bradford over 2 legs and having 3 games that had a combined score line of 15-0. Sunderland showed what potentially this club can do under Lambert. I'm now a little more confident that next season may well be classed as remarkable. I can post a chart to show how much better we are getting if you like? You know for weeks now I've been sitting at home wondering if such a thing existed. Good news!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.Bear Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 This 3 up to strategy reminds me of the Gabby - Angel - Moore one which worked so well during the first half of 06-07. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PieFacE Posted May 2, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Wouldn't it just be typical of Villa if we did become safe and retain our Premier League status, then Lerner/Faulkner were to sack Lambert in a similar way to McLeish saying that the results were not good enough. (Let's face it, the results have not been much of an improvement over McLeish's reign) Whilst I don't think that would happen, I wouldn't be shocked if it did. Edited May 2, 2013 by PieFacE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pacbuddies Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Wouldn't it just be typical of Villa if we did become safe and retain our Premier League status, then Lerner/Faulkner were to sack Lambert in a similar way to McLeish saying that the results were not good enough. (Let's face it, the results have not been much of an improvement over McLeish's reign) Whilst I don't think that would happen, I wouldn't be shocked if it did. The lack of 'You're Getting Sacked In The Morning' chants at VP this season may suggest otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 2, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 2, 2013 The fact that players leave you to go to bigger or more successful clubs does not make you a selling club. The term 'selling club' is probably the least understood and most regularly abused term in football (even more than the term 'world class'). And that's saying something! A selling club is someone like a Crewe Alexandra who literally rely upon the income from player sales in order to survive. They actively sell. We don't need to sell players to survive. Now of course in the hustle and bustle of the transfer market, players change hands, but that's true of all clubs. The fact there are bigger clubs who will come and rob your better players does not make you a selling club. By that logic only the top dog is not a selling club and that's nonsense. We are not a selling club. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 (edited) Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid. There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the table Is it not? Lowton and Westwood from L1 and our "kids" such as Weimann, Baker, Gabby have been excellent at times this year. 2 wins before the end of the season and we will have surged up the table from where we were. I think Lambert is proving that he has got the formula right, pick em young, talented and hungry - why spend more buying players from WBA who will cost more upfront and on wages? Edited May 2, 2013 by Eames Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Wouldn't it just be typical of Villa if we did become safe and retain our Premier League status, then Lerner/Faulkner were to sack Lambert in a similar way to McLeish saying that the results were not good enough. (Let's face it, the results have not been much of an improvement over McLeish's reign) Whilst I don't think that would happen, I wouldn't be shocked if it did. The lack of 'You're Getting Sacked In The Morning' chants at VP this season may suggest otherwise. And Lambert has a plan wereas McLeish had nothing to offer. Worst manager ever in the world ever ever in the universe and i hate it when people say villa fans got rid of him cause he came from birmingham city. Yeah right Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post BOF Posted May 2, 2013 Moderator Popular Post Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid.There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the tableI've had this discussion with others. You could leave that squad untouched and you'll get a surge up the table next season on experience and integration alone. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eames Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Wouldn't it just be typical of Villa if we did become safe and retain our Premier League status, then Lerner/Faulkner were to sack Lambert in a similar way to McLeish saying that the results were not good enough. (Let's face it, the results have not been much of an improvement over McLeish's reign) Whilst I don't think that would happen, I wouldn't be shocked if it did. Despite the results there just hasn't been the outright hostility to the manager this season - I think we have all seen what it is Lambert is trying to achieve and realised the challenges the squad has given him. Add that to the fact that the football (Chelsea aside) has been SO much better this season has meant that we haven't really had cause to get too far on his case. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted May 2, 2013 Moderator Share Posted May 2, 2013 PieFacE is right in one sense. It would be typical if you accept that the club have made mistakes in the past, but I think they've learned from them. So as typical as it might be going on precedence, I would also find it highly surprising and I'd put my house on it not happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 I just find it exciting and a relief that we could be going into the offseason without any manager disruption for the first time in years. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnbull Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid. There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the table I've had this discussion with others. You could leave that squad untouched and you'll get a surge up the table next season on experience and integration alone. Furthermore, survival permitting, the young players will have gained more experience from this season, with the pressure they've been under than say if they'd had an easier time at a mid table club. It's been a baptism of fire for them but the signs are that they've grown immeasurably over the past few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sne Posted May 2, 2013 Share Posted May 2, 2013 Thing is - I still think that job needs to be done. If we start next season with Bennett and Baker as first choice defenders - the failings will quickly become apparent - we need 2 more senior defenders. I think we may have 'got away with it' this season - but the foundations of the defence still need need to laid. There's no point wanting a manager to do something when the chairman won't pay the wages that would make it happen. The job of bringing in the odd established player is a lot easier to do now from an integration point of view, now that we have a good base and now that we know what we have. Ignoring the wages, from a playing point of view it could have been equally as dangerous to bring in a shed load of established players on big wages (see QPR). But as I say, the key point in all of this is that he didn't have the money to go down that route so the point is moot. Supplement the current squad with a few more league 1 players and academy kids - isn't going to produce a surge up the table I've had this discussion with others. You could leave that squad untouched and you'll get a surge up the table next season on experience and integration alone. Not saying your wrong, but that is a bit simplistic. There are soo many parameters. Second season syndrome, the added pressure of being relied on (yes they've had pressure this season to), handling the new fame of being a rich recognisiable PL-player, teams around us weakening or strenghtening... For all that we hope our players will develop to stars and shine some of them might just as likelly turn into another Michael Johnson. IMO we need to strenghten just to stay were we are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts