Shillzz Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Seriously though, WTF is Randy doing at the fayre? yet more evidence that he cares about anything an everything above AVFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 What annoys me about recent transfer policy is that we don't seem to learn any lessons - buying players from "bigger" clubs who haven't played regularly for a while is a huge risk, especially when we have limited resource/wage capacity etc.. - Sidwell was first - Ireland was second - closely followed by Hutton and Jenas I would personally rather we signed players that were playing regularly at a lower level if we are to take a "gamble". players on their way up, rather than on their way down. agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob182 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 What annoys me about recent transfer policy is that we don't seem to learn any lessons - buying players from "bigger" clubs who haven't played regularly for a while is a huge risk, especially when we have limited resource/wage capacity etc.. - Sidwell was first - Ireland was second - closely followed by Hutton and Jenas I would personally rather we signed players that were playing regularly at a lower level if we are to take a "gamble". players on their way up, rather than on their way down. agree Like Shorey & Davies? Transfers can be hit and miss wherever they're from. I don't think we can just say 'Don't buy players that aren't playing for clubs that are currently higher than us!' What if Milner wasn't playing for City? I'd want him back if he wanted to come. Each transfer should be judged on the player and the situation they are in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Randy has spent more of his own money on Villa than anyone in the total history of AVFC. Give the guy a break and accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal. UTV!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DelboyVilla Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Randy has spent more of his own money on Villa than anyone in the total history of AVFC. Give the guy a break and accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal. UTV!!!! Well anyone who spent more than a pound in the club shop could claim the same thing compared to HDE?? I think most people are disappointed with the fact the cost cutting came so suddenly? Randy is not a bad owner you just have to question his judgement and decisions with the important matters at times? Showing off a tattoo that probably pained him for a week does not make up for the pain we endure after the appointment of Houllier followed by McLeish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 9, 2011 Moderator Share Posted November 9, 2011 Randy has spent more of his own money on Villa than anyone in the total history of AVFC. Give the guy a break and accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal. UTV!!!! This is such a pathetic arguement. I don't think there is a single person who thinks that he does or expects him to have that level of wealth. Regardless of how much money he has (or hasn't) put in (most of it is loans on which he has charged interest) the way he has run the club has been poor and a mosiac, a pub and a tattoo don't disguise that. Sure he has done a lot of good things in his time, its far from being all bad but the lack of plan or even good decision making is clear for all to see. The last two years have been a total and utter shambles in which the club has lacked real leadership or direction and some would argue control although I would personally argue a lack of control has been evident for far longer and is largelly responsible for where we are now. I don't know a single Villa fan that needs to "accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal" so you literally have no point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis_B Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Regardless of how much money he has (or hasn't) put in (most of it is loans on which he has charged interest) the way he has run the club has been poor and a mosiac, a pub and a tattoo don't disguise that. That point by Trent is missed by many - he has not put his OWN money in to be LOST, he has INVESTED his and the Lerner Trusts money in the club! Remember his father made his money out of credit cards so rest assured the Lerner funds will not be at risk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What annoys me about recent transfer policy is that we don't seem to learn any lessons - buying players from "bigger" clubs who haven't played regularly for a while is a huge risk, especially when we have limited resource/wage capacity etc.. - Sidwell was first - Ireland was second - closely followed by Hutton and Jenas I would personally rather we signed players that were playing regularly at a lower level if we are to take a "gamble". players on their way up, rather than on their way down. agree Like Shorey & Davies? Transfers can be hit and miss wherever they're from. I don't think we can just say 'Don't buy players that aren't playing for clubs that are currently higher than us!' What if Milner wasn't playing for City? I'd want him back if he wanted to come. Each transfer should be judged on the player and the situation they are in. You have listed a couple of "on the ups" (to use TRO's phrase) that haven't worked. I could counter with Young and Downing. Do you have any "on the downs" to counter my list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barry'sboots Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I don't know a single Villa fan that needs to "accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal" so you literally have no point. Spot on Trent. Those that want to defend Randy keep trotting this line out but it completely misses the point of most people's discontent. It is Randy's poor running of the club - weak board, poor managerial appointments, sanctioning the spiralling wage bill and then trying to correct this in one go and leaving us potentially shorthanded in so doing etc. - that is frustrating many and NOT his inability to compete with Mansour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Usually like to be positive and defend the club, but I couldnt agree more with Trent's post. Regardless of the amount of money loaned to the club, Lerner's governance of AVFC has been short sighted at best. This sentence sums up my feelings particularly well: The last two years have been a total and utter shambles in which the club has lacked real leadership or direction and some would argue control although I would personally argue a lack of control has been evident for far longer and is largelly responsible for where we are now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GarethRDR Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 You have listed a couple of "on the ups" (to use TRO's phrase) that haven't worked. I could counter with Young and Downing. Do you have any "on the downs" to counter my list? Jenas, if he stays fit. His debut was delightful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddywhack Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 What annoys me about recent transfer policy is that we don't seem to learn any lessons - buying players from "bigger" clubs who haven't played regularly for a while is a huge risk, especially when we have limited resource/wage capacity etc.. - Sidwell was first - Ireland was second - closely followed by Hutton and Jenas I would personally rather we signed players that were playing regularly at a lower level if we are to take a "gamble". players on their way up, rather than on their way down. agree Like Shorey & Davies? Transfers can be hit and miss wherever they're from. I don't think we can just say 'Don't buy players that aren't playing for clubs that are currently higher than us!' What if Milner wasn't playing for City? I'd want him back if he wanted to come. Each transfer should be judged on the player and the situation they are in. You have listed a couple of "on the ups" (to use TRO's phrase) that haven't worked. I could counter with Young and Downing. Do you have any "on the downs" to counter my list? Shay Given and Richard Dunne. Rob's spot on. So what clubs shouldn't we buy from, the top 6? Because their players will be rubbish automatically? Seems like a daft rule to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It's about the player and his motivation. Given is classic example of a player sat on a big club's bench that has dropped to our level and who wants to play. I really dont understand the hate for the Davies signing, when we bought him, he played, a lot, and was doing well enough to keep a young Cahill out of the side. I would argue that Delph was an on the up we took a chance on that hasn't really paid off. He cost a fair chunk of cash and has not even begun to pay that back yet. So easy to say that no matter what the approach some signings will be better than others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villabromsgrove Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Randy has spent more of his own money on Villa than anyone in the total history of AVFC. Give the guy a break and accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal. UTV!!!! This is such a pathetic arguement. I don't think there is a single person who thinks that he does or expects him to have that level of wealth. Regardless of how much money he has (or hasn't) put in (most of it is loans on which he has charged interest) the way he has run the club has been poor and a mosiac, a pub and a tattoo don't disguise that. Sure he has done a lot of good things in his time, its far from being all bad but the lack of plan or even good decision making is clear for all to see. The last two years have been a total and utter shambles in which the club has lacked real leadership or direction and some would argue control although I would personally argue a lack of control has been evident for far longer and is largelly responsible for where we are now. I don't know a single Villa fan that needs to "accept that we do not have the wealth of Abu Dhabi at our disposal" so you literally have no point. I've supported Villa since the sixties, so I've seen the highs and lows and I'm comfortable with Randy's ownership of AVFC. I like Randy and I think McLeish is a decent guy and a reasonable manager. I also think that Villa are just about where we should be in the Premiership. I still get excited on match day, and always hope for the best, but not knowing whether we are going to win lose or draw is part of that excitement. Supporting Villa positively should not be a hanging offence! Excuse me if I don't start slagging off a decent guy, who has made a considerable investment in the club I love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 I think the argument seems to balance on how you assess the current financial/wage situation and the reasoning behind the change in policy. Those that think the wages have spiralled way out of controll and the club is on the verge of going bust will argue Lerner is not a good owner. Those who think Lerner took a punt on increasing the club's revenue, and therefore the pot put aside for wages, but now is looking to reduce the outgoings because of the failure to achieve this think he's a fairly decent owner. There is also the UEFA FFP regs hanging over the club's head so even if he wanted to spend more on wages he couldn't and still expect Villa to qualify for UEFA competitions. So in my opininion regardless of who it is sat on the bench, Villa would still be looking to reduce our expenditure on wages this season, because we failed in significantly increasing our income to support a high wage bill. But we do not have HMRC issuing winding up orders, we are not in the position where a bank is like to call in hundreds of millions in loans, and the tightening of the belt is being brought about internally due to the way Randy wants to, or has to run the club. Would people still think he was a good owner if he carried on paying the level of wages we were/are if we did manage to finish in the top 4 for UEFA to ban us from entering the competition? FWIW I dont think he let anything spiral out of control, he approved the wage budget he thought would allow us to expand the earning potential of the club, for a number of reasons that failed and the result was the requirement for a more modest wage bill. Unfortunately what we are seeing is that good players still want big wages and therefore our ability to compete is being hampered by our inability to fund a high wage bill from what is a relatively low income compared to those clubs we wish to displace in the top 5 or 6. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 It's about the player and his motivation. Given is classic example of a player sat on a big club's bench that has dropped to our level and who wants to play. Lol, debatable whether you can call City a big club. Given was certainly and excellent buy though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 9, 2011 VT Supporter Share Posted November 9, 2011 What annoys me about recent transfer policy is that we don't seem to learn any lessons - buying players from "bigger" clubs who haven't played regularly for a while is a huge risk, especially when we have limited resource/wage capacity etc.. - Sidwell was first - Ireland was second - closely followed by Hutton and Jenas I would personally rather we signed players that were playing regularly at a lower level if we are to take a "gamble". players on their way up, rather than on their way down. agree Like Shorey & Davies? Transfers can be hit and miss wherever they're from. I don't think we can just say 'Don't buy players that aren't playing for clubs that are currently higher than us!' What if Milner wasn't playing for City? I'd want him back if he wanted to come. Each transfer should be judged on the player and the situation they are in. You have listed a couple of "on the ups" (to use TRO's phrase) that haven't worked. I could counter with Young and Downing. Do you have any "on the downs" to counter my list? Shay Given and Richard Dunne. Petrov? Bent? (not down from Sunderland, but Sunderland and Villa are "down" from Spurs) Laursen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanisgod Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Lol, debatable whether you can call City a big club. 5 points clear at the top of the table, look like they'll get out of the groups in the CL, able to put out a second string 11 that would beat most PL teams. Able to threaten to leave a player they pay £250k a week to in the reserves. If they're not a big team they're certainly acting like one and I'm sure the majority of their players would consider Villa a step down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villanmike Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Lol, debatable whether you can call City a big club. 5 points clear at the top of the table, look like they'll get out of the groups in the CL, able to put out a second string 11 that would beat most PL teams. Able to threaten to leave a player they pay £250k a week to in the reserves. If they're not a big team they're certainly acting like one and I'm sure the majority of their players would consider Villa a step down. I could act like I was a woman (easily done according to some mates!) if I wish, but doesn't mean I am! IF Villa got a shit load of money (like City), would we become a big club in say, 5 years? (To me a big club is Barcelona, Man Utd, Real Madrid, etc...) I still don't think Chelsea is a big club. Successful, but no way big. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 9, 2011 Author Share Posted November 9, 2011 I'd argue Chelsea are a big club now Did you see all the replica shirts in HK when we played them pre-season? Big Asian following Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts