The Randy Lerner thread

[John]

6 minutes ago, Demitri_C said:

Who else is to blame then??? You cant blame Ellis for this mess, its Randy Lerners fault no one else

I think Deadly has blamed everyone he could think of from manager to board to coaches and players. I agree that the "custodian" that he appointed is to blame for the mess that we now find ourselves in but given HDE's history I have some difficulty in accepting that he a fitting person to be the one portioning the blame.   

[Zatman]

1 hour ago, HeyAnty said:

Hope he is not planning a take over at his age!  Doug doesn't come out and say things for nothing, same way he didnt put in unrealistic bids in for players for nothing.

he was asked the question and he said he couldnt at his age but you could tell that he was tempted

[John]

1 minute ago, avfc1982 said:

Is this a cunning way of blaming Doug for our 6 year decline?

 

and as an aside, what do you mean when you claim he took millions out of the club? Is it based on the fact he dared to take a wage for being chairman? In that case I've taken a fortune out of the company I work for, and I'm assuming you have to, and practically everyone else on here. Honestly it's a pathetic argument to use. 

No the blame rests fair and square with our current "custodian".

He was the first to take such a significant wage for acting as chairman and took a lot more than he paid for his shares when selling to our present "custodian". For me he did not do enough to merit the sums of money he collected from our football club. But that is history now and others have opinions that are different from me on this. I just think that his contribution to the blame game would have been best left unsaid and has not been overly helpful.    

[avfc1982]

6 minutes ago, John said:

No the blame rests fair and square with our current "custodian".

He was the first to take such a significant wage for acting as chairman and took a lot more than he paid for his shares when selling to our present "custodian". For me he did not do enough to merit the sums of money he collected from our football club. But that is history now and others have opinions that are different from me on this. I just think that his contribution to the blame game would have been best left unsaid and has not been overly helpful.    

Okay, so you are basing claims he took millions out of the club because he paid himself a wage. I on the other hand don't have a problem with someone taking a wage for a job of work, and why should I, or anyone for that matter? It's almost like a tabloid sensational style headline where when you read the story underneath bears no resemblance to the headline. 

[John]

 

9 minutes ago, avfc1982 said:

Okay, so you are basing claims he took millions out of the club because he paid himself a wage. I on the other hand don't have a problem with someone taking a wage for a job of work, and why should I, or anyone for that matter? It's almost like a tabloid sensational style headline where when you read the story underneath bears no resemblance to the headline. 

A hefty wage for very little progress and a big profit on the sale of his shares. I have no problem with taking a decent wage for a decent performance but I think what Deadly took in wages and share profit was something way above that. But you have your opinion and I have my own. I played my small part in the protests against Deadly and the way he chose to run our club and I will not be changing my opinion on this. I anticipate the same is the case with your opinions on the matter.Shall we just agree that the present "custodian" is to blame for our current troubles although it seems Deadly would rather spread the blame a little more widely?  

 

[avfc1982]

5 minutes ago, John said:

 

A hefty wage for very little progress and a big profit on the sale of his shares. I have no problem with taking a decent wage for a decent performance but I think what Deadly took in wages and share profit was something way above that. But you have your opinion and I have my own. I played my small part in the protests against Deadly and the way he chose to run our club and I will not be changing my opinion on this. I anticipate the same is the case with your opinions on the matter.Shall we just agree that the present "custodian" is to blame for our current troubles although it seems Deadly would rather spread the blame a little more widely?  

 

Oh absolutely Lerner is 100% to blame for the shitfest we've become. I'm just sick of people harking back to Ellis in an attempt to prove he was worse. He wasn't, and I'd take him every time over the disgrace that is Randy Lerner, and he can even have the audacity to be paid a wage for doing his job as well. 

[John]

5 minutes ago, avfc1982 said:

Oh absolutely Lerner is 100% to blame for the shitfest we've become. I'm just sick of people harking back to Ellis in an attempt to prove he was worse. He wasn't, and I'd take him every time over the disgrace that is Randy Lerner, and he can even have the audacity to be paid a wage for doing his job as well. 

I would have not mentioned Deadly had he not chosen to enter the debate himself. Our present "custodian" does now seem determined to prove himself to be the worst one we have ever had. How, when and the circumstances in which he goes may earn him that title.  

[srsmithusa]

Wait, we can't complain that someone got paid much more than they deserved for what they did?

Can one of the mods go and delete every third post in every player thread? 

[mykeyb]

Lerner or Ellis?..................... Deadly every day of the week. That's how bloody bad Lerner is.

[OutByEaster?]

The idea that Doug could take over the club is laughable. He couldn't afford 10% of it. That's how much the game has moved on. 

I'm not happy with the way in which Lerner has run the club, it's crap - but at least he's mostly robbed himself and hasn't pretended to care.

 

[VillaChris]

On 2/20/2016 at 18:20, OutByEaster? said:

Well the wage bill will have increased, and we did spend a little on transfers in the summer - but I'm not sure that's going to be in this set of accounts. I'm always a bit baffled as to what exactly the timeframes are on the way the club presents its accounts and I'm not sure what period will be covered.

Has it?

We let go of the three biggest earners at the club in D*lph, Benteke and Vlaar given their statuses of either being the captain or the best player at the club. I assume we were paying a decent percentage of Cleverley's weekly wage aswell?

Yes we made a lot of signings but most of them came from the French league. The average wage of the french league is miles off what it is in the prem. Only two I can see bumping it up are Richards as I do think talk of him being on 60k is pretty credible (so on a decent amount more than Vlaar was here) and Adama on a mad contract. It's still only two players though although I dread the sort of wage increases the likes of Clark, Bacuna and Westwood got from their 5 year deals so guess that has bumped things up again.

On the more general theme I have to agree on the general points Grasshopper and OBE are making.

Hollis might aswell be dressed as a grim reaper when he turns up at VP, he's basically admitted as much which has got him stick on here and no doubt he'll be hacking away at the carcass as soon as relegation is confirmed.

At what point will it be counter productive though?

It's alright needing to cut costs (which we've been doing for the last 5 years anyway) but people will want to see a competitive team at the championship level. Heck that's the whole reason most want us to go down...."so we can win more games next season."

We cost cut even more and we become stagnant in the championship and indeed look more likely to get out the other way into league one which is happening to Charlton and Bolton with Blackburn and Fulham not too far away. All clubs who were in the premier league for years.

I just wish Lerner would f*** off.

[markavfc40]

On 20/02/2016 at 18:20, OutByEaster? said:

Well the wage bill will have increased, and we did spend a little on transfers in the summer - but I'm not sure that's going to be in this set of accounts. I'm always a bit baffled as to what exactly the timeframes are on the way the club presents its accounts and I'm not sure what period will be covered.

I would be amazed if the wage bill increased this season. Bent finally left and was on anywhere between 65k and 85k depending what you believe and even when he went out on loan only a fraction of that would have been covered, Delph, Benteke, Given would all have been on 50k+, Vlaar and Cleverley (season loan) around the 40k mark. Weimann and Lowton would have been on decent money. Then you have the likes of Tonev, Luna, Helenius, Herd, Sylla who all left and Baker and Bennett out on loan and Senderos and Cole off in January.

The only new signings over the summer likely to be on big money would be Richards, Lescott and Adama. The rest will be getting paid at best average Prem wages and in a lot of cases at the lower end of the scale.
 

Edited February 25, 2016 by markavfc40

[VillaChris]

Oh yes I forgot Bent and Given went in the summer, you can add another 100k p week off the wage bill from those two.

[OutByEaster?]

Ayew was our second most expensive ever signing, he'll be on £60k, Veretout will have demanded an average premier league wage of around £40k, Richards and Lescott will be on £100k a week between them, Amavi will be on £40k. I shtik the wage bill will have gone up, because wages have gone up with the new TV deal - I think wages would have gone up more if we'd tried to keep Delph, Benteke or Cleverley. Some of the others were on lower wages because they were either gambling at the idea they could make it in this league, or their contracts were old.

It's possible it could have gone either way, but I we have a bigger squad this year and we were underpaying some of the players that left. I'm still backing an upwards move.

 

[VillaChris]

Just now, OutByEaster? said:

Ayew was our second most expensive ever signing, he'll be on £60k, Veretout will have demanded an average premier league wage of around £40k, Richards and Lescott will be on £100k a week between them, Amavi will be on £40k. I shtik the wage bill will have gone up, because wages have gone up with the new TV deal - I think wages would have gone up more if we'd tried to keep Delph, Benteke or Cleverley. Some of the others were on lower wages because they were either gambling at the idea they could make it in this league, or their contracts were old.

It's possible it could have gone either way, but I we have a bigger squad this year and we were underpaying some of the players that left. I'm still backing an upwards move.

 

How much would they have been on in France though?

You really think Ayew was earning even 40k a week at Lorient, they are a pretty small club even in France. Outside of Lyon, PSG, Monaco and Marseille I think it's reasonably to say France league players aren't that highly paid. So if he was on 20-30k at Lorient, we'd given him a 50% wage rise, blimey.

If that is true our basic model is all wrong...signing players from the French league who are on average between 20-30k and bumping up their deals to between 40-60k.

It's better to do what Spurs do....sign some like Modric on a 4 year deal at 25k a week and then when he's settled down and proven himself then get him to sign a new deal on around 50k.

Rather do that than just sign players willy nilly inflating the wage bill and then we all scratch our heads as to why they're not that good and we're bottom of the league.

[OutByEaster?]

But that £25k a week they were paying Modric IS £50-60k now. Spurs upped it to £60k a week at the end of the first year and offered him £100k a week to keep him away from Chelsea the year before he joined Madrid - nowadays that number could be anything. A player that's on a contract he signed four years ago is likely on about half what he's worth. I think we have tried to do what Spurs did, but we've started from an incredibly weak foundation and ended up building a house that fell down.

Ayew, Amavi and co. won't have been comparing what we were offering to their wages in France, they'll have been comparing them to what Sunderland were offering, what Newcastle were offering, what West Ham were offering. The average wage for a player in this league is now around £45k a week. They'll have wanted that.

If Ayew stays in this league, then next season he'll be looking for someone to give him £80k - he'll probably get it too. The money in the Premier league is bonkers. We're in a league where Stoke can afford to outbid and outlay Inter Milan for players.

[OutByEaster?]

*and sorry, he wasn't our second highest signing - I've got £11.5m in my head from somewhere, and that wouldn't make him second most expensive even if it were true. 

 

[VillaChris]

Maybe but then isn't Dele Alli only on 20k a week at Spurs or even less according to reports a few weeks back. Yes he came from league 1 but you could apply that logic of us and other possibly paying him double that.

I've just had a look at the Lorient squad for this season, only one of about 20 I've ever heard of is Alain Traore. 

Unless they did a massive fire sale in the summer like us I can't believe Ayew was even on 30k a week there as that would've been double what all those would be on.

I just think to give unproven premier league players 50% wage rises before they've even done anything in this league is a bit bizarre. 

Edit:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3395466/Dele-Alli-signs-new-five-year-deal-Spurs-impressive-start-career-White-Hart-Lane.html

Quote

Dele  Alli has seen his salary increase by a staggering 600 per cent in under a year after signing a new Tottenham contract.

The midfielder has signed a new five-and-a-half-year deal that will see his £12,000 per week rocket to £25,000. Alli was earning just £3,500 when he signed from MK Dons on February 2 last year.

Alli’s deal is part of a contract renewal drive from Tottenham, which also includes vice-captain Harry Kane and Mousa Dembele. 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3395466/Dele-Alli-signs-new-five-year-deal-Spurs-impressive-start-career-White-Hart-Lane.html#ixzz41DlBlZr2 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Something ain't right to me there, we give unproven french league players 40k a week to play in the premier league and Spurs off Alli just 12k and he signs no problem.

Edited February 25, 2016 by VillaChris

[John]

36 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

Something ain't right to me there, we give unproven french league players 40k a week to play in the premier league and Spurs off Alli just 12k and he signs no problem.

Given he also chose them rather than us it seems we either offered him the same or less or the pull of London and the opportunity to play for them rather than us led to him choosing to move there despite a lower salary offer from Spurs. 

[VillaChris]

Of course and that Spurs are a miles better team than us.

However Liverpool were also in for Dele Alli let's not forget.

It's a bit like we beat Man. City for D*lph all those years back. Didn't he get a starting contract for us on about 30k so if so 7 years down the line and Spurs are still signing very promising players on 10k a week.