The Randy Lerner thread

[Baker]

The good news is we didn't add any deadwood to the team and complicate our long-term strategy should we actually believe the propaganda. The bad news is that we are throwing the dice with staying up. RL has totally bottled it staying quiet. Leadership starts at the top.

[Big_John_10]

I don't think there's any plan to make us a top team. I think that's people kidding themselves to try and explain such an awful season.

 

 

At least they realised what a short-sighted, and how long-term dangerous the MON approach was.

Who?

[Richard]

I don't think there's any plan to make us a top team. I think that's people kidding themselves to try and explain such an awful season.

 

 

At least they realised what a short-sighted, and how long-term dangerous the MON approach was.

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes.  What was short sighted ,  it seems,  was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that.  Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault,  but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

[PussEKatt]

 

I don't think there's any plan to make us a top team. I think that's people kidding themselves to try and explain such an awful season.

 

 

At least they realised what a short-sighted, and how long-term dangerous the MON approach was.

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes.  What was short sighted ,  it seems,  was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that.  Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault,  but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

Thats right,We were right up there with Liverpool,Arsenal etc etc.We had long runs in the cups and played in europe each year.With Lerners cost cutting we are now right down among the relegation fighters.The amount of spending has a direct bearing on the league position.

[PieFacE]

 

I don't think there's any plan to make us a top team. I think that's people kidding themselves to try and explain such an awful season.

 

 

At least they realised what a short-sighted, and how long-term dangerous the MON approach was.

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes.  What was short sighted ,  it seems,  was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that.  Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault,  but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

It's not that the owner couldn't afford it. It's that we as a club can't afford it. If top 6 wages is taking up 80% of our turnover then that's not completely Randy's fault is it? You could argue that it's his fault for not making AVFC a "bigger" name which would bring in more revenue, but it's not exactly an easy thing to do without signing star players or having Champions League football. But he had a crack at the Champions League and he and the manager he trusted failed. 

[blandy]

Richard, on 19 Feb 2013 - 12:17, said:

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes. What was short sighted , it seems, was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that. Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault, but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

We (he) could afford and did afford it. What he didn't know was that the world financial climate would change, that his personal circs would change and that other clubs would do what he did, but with oodles more money (Man City being the prime example, but also Liverpool etc).

Additionally they did say, right from the start that they'd top load - spend up front, then reign it in. Where it went wrong apart from the changes in the world, the game, and his own circs, is that the club didn't qualify for the Eurotelly Cup money.

it was a gamble that looked better odds at the start, than at the end, so to speak.

In terms of a plan, it was his money, he wanted to do it, he lost the gamble. Meh.

I'd more go with criticism of managerial choices and lack of boardroom expertise in the second phase of his ownership than have a go at him for what he did at the start. There's not a soul I can think of said anything at the time against what he was doing in terms of a plan.

[dickyhell]

Can you tell me when they said "they'd top load - spend up front, then reign it in"

[briny_ear]

I know I'll get jumped on as a pedant, grammar policeman, etc., but can I just say it once, then I'll fall silent?

 

You REIN something in, not REIGN. I e, it's like you are riding a horse that's going too fast and you want to stop it, so you pull on the reins - rein it in.

 

Reign is what the Queen does.

[coda]

Randy should've reined in the spending during MON's reign.

[Richard]

Richard, on 19 Feb 2013 - 12:17, said:

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes. What was short sighted , it seems, was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that. Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault, but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

We (he) could afford and did afford it. What he didn't know was that the world financial climate would change, that his personal circs would change and that other clubs would do what he did, but with oodles more money (Man City being the prime example, but also Liverpool etc).

Additionally they did say, right from the start that they'd top load - spend up front, then reign it in. Where it went wrong apart from the changes in the world, the game, and his own circs, is that the club didn't qualify for the Eurotelly Cup money.

it was a gamble that looked better odds at the start, than at the end, so to speak.

In terms of a plan, it was his money, he wanted to do it, he lost the gamble. Meh.

I'd more go with criticism of managerial choices and lack of boardroom expertise in the second phase of his ownership than have a go at him for what he did at the start. There's not a soul I can think of said anything at the time against what he was doing in terms of a plan.

We / he couldnt afford to sustain it,  and it is the sustaining it that was obviously required.  His investment in players for a thre or four year period was never going to be enough. I dont buy the "oh but other clubs spent big" argument as an excuse for this either to be honest. I mean we are in a competitive business,  did he not expect up front that other clubs would also buy better players?  Thats the game we are in.  Besides which there are plenty of good players out there ,  more than the ones bought by man citeh,  to get the job done.  Truth is the spend was never going to be enough,  he couldnt afford it.  Liverpool didnt spend much more than us,  until King Kenny come back and spent the 50M they got for Torres.  Arsenal famously dont spend,  ask their fans.

 

In terms of not a soul,  well there was one soul who said that what he was spending was not enough,  that it couldnt stop there and he had to continue to spend big and that if he couldnt afford it either get more investment into the club or step aside.

 

To get the ultimate success at football these days, or certainly the success that he said he wanted for the club,  it takes money I'm afraid more money than he is prepared to spend.  Even standing still takes money,  more money than he is prepared to spend it seems.  I guess thats why I'm now pretty comfortable with Lambert and his plan because I do not expect us to ever challenge for top 6 while Lerner remains,  I expect us to be in and around mid table with a challenge for a cup every now and again. But even that stability will take some building to get to. A club like us cannot even retain the players it has to enable that thanks to Lerner.

 

In terms of criticms of his early years,  I'll keep those thanks as the biggest one is perhaps his unrealistic setting of expectations at the start of his reign,  promising things he could not deliver.  It was a sham a medicine man pitch of the wild west.

[PussEKatt]

I go along with that 100%.We spent big during MON's reign and we were near the top, now we spend **** all and we are in the relegation zone.The thing is that if he is looking to the future of the club, shouldent he be trying to take care of the present first ? And what if we stay up.....next season when the players we have are better than they are this year and want more $$$$, then what,?  We move them on, as high erners and buy from the lower leagues again, and ......go again. 

[sne]

From the very start they said they were gonna run this club as "a buisness", whatever that means. Running a football club is a horrible idea if you wan't to make money.

It's more or less impossible to A make money, B be successfull, C keep the shareholders and D keep fans happy at the same time. At best you can hope to do 1 of those things, for a short period maybe 2. I guess it depends on how you measure success, but if the aim is to win it won't work.

The most successfull clubs in the world (Man U, Real Madrid, Barca...) all have massive debts and teams like Lyon, Inter and Valencia are imploding. No one can claim that PSG or Man C are run as a realistic buisness model.

If you wan't to find well run clubs i guess the Bundesliga is the place to look but teams like Bayern and Dortmund have massive support, cheap tickets and 99,7% (71.000) resp 100% (80.500) home attendance so emulating Dortmund in such a competative league as ours is just a silly pipedream

 

Imagine Mr Randy Lerner presenting his buisness idea for the Drangons' Den. They would not be impressed, especially since he knows nothing about the buisness (football) he's venturing into.

 

Like it or not, the only way we'll ever be a winning club again is if we get a new mega rich owner, id say go after the Gazprom guy, they have more money than they know what to do with.

[blandy]

 

Richard, on 19 Feb 2013 - 12:17, said:

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes. What was short sighted , it seems, was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that. Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault, but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

We (he) could afford and did afford it. What he didn't know was that the world financial climate would change, that his personal circs would change and that other clubs would do what he did, but with oodles more money (Man City being the prime example, but also Liverpool etc).

Additionally they did say, right from the start that they'd top load - spend up front, then reign it in. Where it went wrong apart from the changes in the world, the game, and his own circs, is that the club didn't qualify for the Eurotelly Cup money.

it was a gamble that looked better odds at the start, than at the end, so to speak.

In terms of a plan, it was his money, he wanted to do it, he lost the gamble. Meh.

I'd more go with criticism of managerial choices and lack of boardroom expertise in the second phase of his ownership than have a go at him for what he did at the start. There's not a soul I can think of said anything at the time against what he was doing in terms of a plan.

We / he couldnt afford to sustain it,  and it is the sustaining it that was obviously required.  His investment in players for a thre or four year period was never going to be enough. I dont buy the "oh but other clubs spent big" argument as an excuse for this either to be honest. I mean we are in a competitive business,  did he not expect up front that other clubs would also buy better players?  Thats the game we are in.  Besides which there are plenty of good players out there ,  more than the ones bought by man citeh,  to get the job done.  Truth is the spend was never going to be enough,  he couldnt afford it.  Liverpool didnt spend much more than us,  until King Kenny come back and spent the 50M they got for Torres.  Arsenal famously dont spend,  ask their fans.

 

In terms of not a soul,  well there was one soul who said that what he was spending was not enough,

- not at the start, not until the end of MO'N's time, pretty much. And complaining he was not spending enough, as against spending unaffordably.

He's still spending - 50 odd million last year, 20 million in the summer, more throughout the year, on wage defecits.

To get the ultimate success at football these days, or certainly the success that he said he wanted for the club,  it takes money

That's true, and that's where old words and deeds no longer match. A totally valid point. New words, in those letters from 18 months ago no longer talk about challenging for the top honours and stuff. Just balance sheet and do the best we can, run the club sustainably. I'm OK with that, plenty aren't, plenty prefer the financial doping and arms race of ever increasing and ludicrous spending. You takes your choice, they pays their money... 

[Denis_B]

Randy said when he joined the club that if he wanted to make money he wouldn't have bought a football club. I can't find the quotes now though. He knew therefore he was probably going to make a loss so the idea of running it as a business sounds a little contrary.

[Denis_B]

How about this gem from Genral C Crulak in Oct 2006

We need to NEVER stop communicating as mature individuals. Even when
we are upset, we MUST communicate or we will ALL lose. Randy and the
Board are committed to communicating in good times and bad!! All we ask
is the same from you.

Proves what a load of bollocks they spouted to win us over - or maybe thats it, no communication from Lerner because he accepts we have lost

Edited February 20, 2013 by Denis_B

[sne]

Randy said when he joined the club that if he wanted to make money he wouldn't have bought a football club. I can't find the quotes now though. He knew therefore he was probably going to make a loss so the idea of running it as a business sounds a little contrary.

It sure does, pretty sure Krulak was the one who said the things about running the club as a buisness very early on in when they took over

[Ikantcpell]

Sell up plz to someone who cares alittle more than you..

[Richard]

 

 

Richard, on 19 Feb 2013 - 12:17, said:

We paid top 6 wages and got top 6 finishes. What was short sighted , it seems, was that the club / owner couldn't afford even that. Not sure how that was the then Manager's fault, but it is a urban myth that continues to be peddled in order to suit the owner's agenda.

We (he) could afford and did afford it. What he didn't know was that the world financial climate would change, that his personal circs would change and that other clubs would do what he did, but with oodles more money (Man City being the prime example, but also Liverpool etc).

Additionally they did say, right from the start that they'd top load - spend up front, then reign it in. Where it went wrong apart from the changes in the world, the game, and his own circs, is that the club didn't qualify for the Eurotelly Cup money.

it was a gamble that looked better odds at the start, than at the end, so to speak.

In terms of a plan, it was his money, he wanted to do it, he lost the gamble. Meh.

I'd more go with criticism of managerial choices and lack of boardroom expertise in the second phase of his ownership than have a go at him for what he did at the start. There's not a soul I can think of said anything at the time against what he was doing in terms of a plan.

 

We / he couldnt afford to sustain it,  and it is the sustaining it that was obviously required.  His investment in players for a thre or four year period was never going to be enough. I dont buy the "oh but other clubs spent big" argument as an excuse for this either to be honest. I mean we are in a competitive business,  did he not expect up front that other clubs would also buy better players?  Thats the game we are in.  Besides which there are plenty of good players out there ,  more than the ones bought by man citeh,  to get the job done.  Truth is the spend was never going to be enough,  he couldnt afford it.  Liverpool didnt spend much more than us,  until King Kenny come back and spent the 50M they got for Torres.  Arsenal famously dont spend,  ask their fans.

 

In terms of not a soul,  well there was one soul who said that what he was spending was not enough,

- not at the start, not until the end of MO'N's time, pretty much. And complaining he was not spending enough, as against spending unaffordably.

He's still spending - 50 odd million last year, 20 million in the summer, more throughout the year, on wage defecits.

Was about 18 months before MON left actually, towards April in the year before he left

 

If only the thread hadnt been pruned I've looked for it no end of times.

[blandy]

Was about 18 months before MON left actually, towards April in the year before he left

Ok. Still 2 and a half years in , then, which was my point, really. At the start, when they said what they were going to do, no-one said "no, that's awful" to a man/woman/child we all said "yippee" and at that time, at the start, people thought if he spent big for a couple of years, we could get back to where we wanted to be. As it turned out, we didn't quite make it, MO'N's limitations came to light, then the world changed, then he stopped throwing money at it in the same way.

I don't think having the most money is a guarantee of having the most success, I've always felt that there's more to it than that. That said, having no money is pretty much a guarantee of doing badly in the winning things stakes - in that situation, success becomes staying in the league. I guess that's where we are right now, if we're lucky.

If we're optimistic we can hope that sorted out finances, if we stay up might mean a chance to try a more sustainable way, and in the climate of FFP etc. if we're pessimistic, we can only fear a permanent glass ceiling for us and just a spiral of decline.

Re that thread and whatever happened to it, I'm sure lots of people made some very good points from different perspectives, and the thing is, while I completely disagree with your view and outlook on how things should be run, philosophically, I do accept that if I had your philosophy, I'd probably say what you say.

ANd the advantage of it being gone, is anyone can say "As I wrote in that thread ages ago...." and claim they were right, and no one can show they were wrong, by quoting them.

[maqroll]

How about this gem from Genral C Crulak in Oct 2006

We need to NEVER stop communicating as mature individuals. Even when

we are upset, we MUST communicate or we will ALL lose. Randy and the

Board are committed to communicating in good times and bad!! All we ask

is the same from you.

Proves what a load of bollocks they spouted to win us over - or maybe thats it, no communication from Lerner because he accepts we have lost

Krulak, Master of Platitudes