maqroll Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Just thought I'd pop in and say hi. I've got nothing to contribute. Is this the Asian consortium that we've been hoping for? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 And now we are a club the same stature as Wigan thanks to Lerner messing it up. Ellis was noway good not in the slightest, yet the club was an attractive proposition when he came to sell it and he sold it no problems. Are we an attractive proposition now? And there's more money in the game than ever before Things were so bad at the Club when Ellis sold that, if he had not done so, I suspect we may well have crashed down through the divisions with him remaining in charge.and now it's different ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 It's definitely not as bad as it was under Ellis IMO. That's not to say that it's particularly good either but it's better than the days of refusing to pay for things like mosquito repellant and coffee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holtender67 Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 (edited) have to disagree with you there lexion, doug was open and fair with us fans we never sat here waiting like seated dogs with our tongue out waiting on his masters every word. we knew exactly what was going on because he respected us fans, doug in my opinion backed his managers more times than none but dougs biggest downfall was he was impatiant. he is a villa fan through and through and wanted success quickly just like us. in those days there was no sky sports or premier league lavishing clubs with cash he had to do it all on his own.how many of us fans called for managers heads and doug abliged accordingly, do you think lambert would have lasted this long under doug, i think not. we had some great players which doug paid top cash for. what would you give now for the platts,saunders,houghtons,atkinsons,taylors. the list could go on............... so lets be brutaly honest here doug never treated us like we were a bunch of nuckle thumping pricks the way that lerner is treating us so i say things in todays market would have had doug purring with all this cash and we would be in a better position playing side wise. so i say lerner should piss off to his salemites and hand the keys back to doug........UTV Edited July 21, 2014 by holtender67 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 I disagree - I don't think Lerner treats us like that at all, he just very rarely says anything, which leads to all sorts of assumptions like the one you're making about how he views us. You say that Lambert wouldn't still be around if Doug was in charge but then you says that Doug's biggest downfall was the fact that he was impatient anyway, which I think is a bit of a contradiction. What players did Doug pay 'top cash' for? Lerner's forked out a lot more for players than Doug ever did - several players would have broken our previous transfer record. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NIVillan Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 The infrastructure of the Club was also run down under Ellis. Reports of him going around turning everything off to save money on the electricity bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 We were such a shit club under Ellis that once we were up for sale it took ages for someone to buy us, oh hang on...... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 We were such a shit club under Ellis that once we were up for sale it took ages for someone to buy us, oh hang on...... Because the situation was exactly the same? Come on Richard - the profile of the Premier League has changed a lot since then, plus the asking price is a lot higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mykeyb Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 I think like most people I wanted to see the back of Doug but by christ nowhere near as much as I want to see the back of the current owner. Not because he has stopped funding the club, that was his choice, By the same token I dont feel sorry for him, noone put a gun to his head and forced him to throw money at the club and frankly if he has lost most of it thats his own bad luck or moreover judgement. The fact that despite a huge boost in TV revenue coming in to the club we are scraping around for bosmans and cheap signings which are to supplement probably one of the worst squads I have seen down VP in the 40 years of supporting AVFC. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 A Lernister always pays his debts 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Profile of the premier is more high profile, there is more money around and the asking price is higher because of the poor way in which the business has been run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 There is a myth, widely accepted among many Villa fans that Randy Lerner has spent a lot on transfer fee's in his time here. Yet when you look at the total transfer spending and transfer income over his time here (both sets of figures taken from Soccerbase so both you would assume open to the same level of accuracy or otherwise) the result simply doesn't bare this out. In the 8 years he has been here the net spend is around £76m, or put another way £9.5m a season as an average. I think that should make a few people reassess their view on him. I appreciate that net spending on players isn't the only outlay involved in the club, their are wages and infrastructure but I suspect the above net transfer figures will surprise a few. He should be extremely grateful to still own a Premier League club. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 The fact that it is way more than that surprises me you posted it. Everyone and his dog knows it wasn't about fees it was about wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Doug Ellis sold the European cup winning team because he was bitter about not owning us at the time of our biggest success Lerner will never top that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted July 21, 2014 Yes everyone knows the wage bill got out of hand (Lerner's fault and responsibility) but I think looking at his net investment on player fee's during his time here still has a place in any assessment of his tenure. Especially given that quite a regular defense offered for him is that he has spent a lot on players over his time here, quite simply he hasn't. The net spend on transfers over his tenure is about as small as you could get, I doubt many if any clubs have a lower net spend over an 8 year Premier League period. It should also be considered when people assess the managers that have followed O'Neill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhInTrinity Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 We can talk about Randy's spending etc, It was the way he left the club to be run, we talk about wages, which owner let the wages spiral out of control. Fact is we overpaid for a lot of players, people will blame MON. Then look at the logic of giving Houllier 24million to buy a striker, another 6million to buy a midfielder. Now look at the values of those players. Then on top of that, we bring in McLeish, he allows him to give N'Zog and Given stupid long-term contracts. Then add all the money he has paid for removing and hiring managers, he just didn't know how to run a football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feidhlim Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Yes everyone knows the wage bill got out of hand (Lerner's fault and responsibility) but I think looking at his net investment on player fee's during his time here still has a place in any assessment of his tenure. Especially given that quite a regular defense offered for him is that he has spent a lot on players over his time here, quite simply he hasn't. The net spend on transfers over his tenure is about as small as you could get, I doubt many if any clubs have a lower net spend over an 8 year Premier League period. It should also be considered when people assess the managers that have followed O'Neill. Arsenal had 30 million credit between 2007 and 2012 Spending money doesn't equate to success. Lerner's tenure should be looked at as a failure based on more than money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feidhlim Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 We can talk about Randy's spending etc, It was the way he left the club to be run, we talk about wages, which owner let the wages spiral out of control. Fact is we overpaid for a lot of players, people will blame MON. Then look at the logic of giving Houllier 24million to buy a striker, another 6million to buy a midfielder. Now look at the values of those players. Then on top of that, we bring in McLeish, he allows him to give N'Zog and Given stupid long-term contracts. Then add all the money he has paid for removing and hiring managers, he just didn't know how to run a football club. I don't agree with this either. Lerner can be blamed for appointing shit managers. Though in his defence, on paper, Houllier was a good signing for Villa at the time. Are you suggesting the chairman should have interferred with the manager and his signings / contracts? Fans would have been up in arms had he done that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozvillafan Posted July 21, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted July 21, 2014 Profile of the premier is more high profile, there is more money around and the asking price is higher because of the poor way in which the business has been run Come again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 He is trying to recoup money , money he has spent. Money he spent recklessly it transpires. So the asking price is higher because of that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts