The Randy Lerner thread

[KHV]

He's a very wealthy man and 12 months ago sold one of his assets for $1 billion.

We're also a club that makes more money than the majority of clubs.

He can afford to run this club but his stupid decisions have cost him a fortune and now he's choosing not to spend more than he has to while we survive.

It seems to me that he is running this club the exact same way he ran the Cleveland Browns,eg downhill.

The browns have always been shit. Lets not forget he never wanted the browns it was left to him by his father. There was also a clause saying Randy could not sell the franchise for a certain number of years. The browns situation is different, even a shit franchise can make a profit and the browns did make profit. making money in football is totally different. I think Lerner was naive when he let MON have a free reign on spending.

Villa was his purchase, he isnt running it in to the ground but he has made mistakes

[Avfc96]

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

[Zatman]

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

 

Peace Cup

[P3te]

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

[hippo]

 

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

 

 

That was Mark Ansells plan - it doesn't really work, because you are self sufficent by scrimping on players - if you start to buy big players - the self sufficency goes. Its the attitude and ambition that counts. 

[Kwan]

He's a very wealthy man and 12 months ago sold one of his assets for $1 billion.

We're also a club that makes more money than the majority of clubs.

He can afford to run this club but his stupid decisions have cost him a fortune and now he's choosing not to spend more than he has to while we survive.

It seems to me that he is running this club the exact same way he ran the Cleveland Browns,eg downhill.

The browns have always been shit. Lets not forget he never wanted the browns it was left to him by his father. There was also a clause saying Randy could not sell the franchise for a certain number of years. The browns situation is different, even a shit franchise can make a profit and the browns did make profit. making money in football is totally different. I think Lerner was naive when he let MON have a free reign on spending.

Villa was his purchase, he isnt running it in to the ground but he has made mistakes

So much this. Randy messed up here but to compare it to the browns situation is disingenuous. Completely different situations.

[Isa]

So it is either spend big on Bent or spend peanuts on a bargain-basement signing like Simon Dawkins? Of course no in between was possible I assume?

This January proved that Lerner was perfectly happy to stand idly by whilst the club looked to be sliding towards the Championship.

I don't get the assumption regarding January. The owners track record has been to back his managers when asked. There is no evidence that Paul Lambert requested funding in January and, given PL's stubborn nature regarding the none-use of players on the books at that time, it appears that it was the manager who thought that he could see the season through with what he had.

If that is the case, he was right.

Disagree. Firstly in the run-up to January, Lambert made quite a few noises about bringing players in (http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11677/8218979/Aston-Villa-boss-Paul-Lambert-plans-to-strengthen-his-squad-in-January). However during January he changed his tune and claimed we might not bring anyone in at all and not because he didn't want to (http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/aston-villa-manager-paul-lambert-1223077).

It is no coincidence that we only started to move for any players after Lerner released that statement towards the end of the window. Even then, he gave Lambert the absolute bare minimum. £3m according to Moxley:

Lerner has always backed his managers and he has added to the £21million gave Lambert in the summer with additional funding in the new year - although with an estimated £3m to play with there will be limits as to what the club can do in the next 24 hours.

Finally any manager with an inkling of money to spend does not go for a player like Simon Dawkins.

[SikhInTrinity]

Remind me how much QPR spent? We all envied them right, remind me where they ended up. We are cutting our cloth accordingly, this may be seen as a lack of ambiton, call it what you want however we are where we are.

[Big_John_10]

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

A massive IF is needed with this delightful dream.

It all comes done to IF that's Lerner's plan.

Remind me how much QPR spent? We all envied them right, remind me where they ended up. We are cutting our cloth accordingly, this may be seen as a lack of ambiton, call it what you want however we are where we are.

Are you saying that all clubs who show ambition end up like QPR?

[Mantis]

Not the whole "ambition" thing again. Us keeping Benteke for at least another season is far more "ambitious" than spunking loads of money on mediocre players.

[blandy]

Are you saying that all clubs who show ambition end up like QPR?

 

I think he's pointing out that clubs who spend more than they can afford for a long time , end up like QPR. QPR did. So did Pompey. And Leeds, and so have many others.

I don't think "ambition" and spending money are exactly the same thing. If someone else does, then that's their right, of course, though they're wrong

 

Any owner has a responsibility to ensure the club continues to exist, in a state of sustainable existence. Many have failed in that.

[Big_John_10]

Not the whole "ambition" thing again. Us keeping Benteke for at least another season is far more "ambitious" than spunking loads of money on mediocre players.

So you think we're an ambitious club then?

[neil3241]

 

 

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

A massive IF is needed with this delightful dream.

It all comes done to IF that's Lerner's plan.

Remind me how much QPR spent? We all envied them right, remind me where they ended up. We are cutting our cloth accordingly, this may be seen as a lack of ambiton, call it what you want however we are where we are.

Are you saying that all clubs who show ambition end up like QPR?

 

 

Well we tried the QPR way and it was nice while it lasted but it would have bankrupted us if it was continued.

[Big_John_10]

Are you saying that all clubs who show ambition end up like QPR?

I think he's pointing out that clubs who spend more than they can afford for a long time , end up like QPR. QPR did. So did Pompey. And Leeds, and so have many others.

I don't think "ambition" and spending money are exactly the same thing. If someone else does, then that's their right, of course, though they're wrong

Any owner has a responsibility to ensure the club continues to exist, in a state of sustainable existence. Many have failed in that.

Yes I'd agree ambition and spending money don't necessarily go together.

I just think the whole "at least we're not Leeds"'excuse is a bit weak at times. Now it seems to be anyone who is unhappy wants us to do what QPR did.

[Isa]

Remind me how much QPR spent? We all envied them right, remind me where they ended up. We are cutting our cloth accordingly, this may be seen as a lack of ambiton, call it what you want however we are where we are.

Just another of what I call 'two extremes' arguments. It was either spend as we did or spend as QPR did. No in between was possible...

[Mantis]

 

Not the whole "ambition" thing again. Us keeping Benteke for at least another season is far more "ambitious" than spunking loads of money on mediocre players.

So you think we're an ambitious club then?

 

To an extent yes.

[P3te]

 

 

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

A massive IF is needed with this delightful dream.

Of course it's his plan, it's the one that makes him the most profit when he sells

Edited September 26, 2013 by P3te

[Big_John_10]

Not the whole "ambition" thing again. Us keeping Benteke for at least another season is far more "ambitious" than spunking loads of money on mediocre players.

So you think we're an ambitious club then?

To an extent yes.

And that's why Randy Lerner is a happy man.

[Big_John_10]

So we are back to square one. Lerner has been at the club now 7 years and what do we have to show for it? **** all. No trophies and relegation battles for each of the last three seasons.

If we come out of it being one of the few self sufficient clubs in the league, while retaining our premier league place, we'll be incredibly well placed for the future and it'll all have been worthwhile

A massive IF is needed with this delightful dream.

Of course it's his plan, it's the one that makes him the most profit when he sells

So you're hoping he finds a buyer as soon as we reach this magical point?

So we have to suffer and gamble while he gets money back from his loans in the hope that when it's finally clear (god knows how long that will take) that he then sells us to someone better.

Stuff all fans dream of for their football club.

[Kwan]

I don't think we're an ambitious club right now. In MON's days, an ambitious club maybe.

 

Right now, we're probably a stabilizing club. A wait and see approach, one that draws apt criticisms of "not doing anything." I don't think an ownerr that splashes out 20M+ for Bent and how many more millions for all of the MON signings can be seen as unambitious. But I think RL learned some hard lessons and he's treading more carefully, even to the point of not supplying the funds in January last season.

 

If we get to the point where we have a reasonable chance of starting to threaten the top 8, it would be a good test of RL's "ambitions." Of course, we have to get there first and that's what I think PL was brought here to do.

 

This is just my opinion as I think not one of us knows anything about the internal finances or directives of the club. It's not as easy as judging what happens on the pitch.

 

As for the oil money approach, I can see why people would be for it, but it's just not for me. I think there was a similar topic in this forum about whether or not you would still support Villa if it was an oil money club, but it just isn't for me.

Edited September 26, 2013 by Kwan