The Randy Lerner thread

[houllierout]

As the weeks pass it becomes clear Lerner doesnt have a clue.... and thats me putting it nicely.

[Mantis]

You’d think a penny might of dropped for Lerner/Falkner over the summer. Having sacked O’Neill who was one a one year rolling contract they found themselves having to give him just over a mill in a pay off. Having thankfully **** off Houllier they found themselves having to pay him in excess of 3mill in a pay off due to having given him a 3 year deal.

Armed with the above what do they do? They give McLeish a 3 year deal. It is bad enough they appointed McLeish but like Houllier to give him a three year deal was madness.

They never sacked O'Neill.

[houllierout]

You’d think a penny might of dropped for Lerner/Falkner over the summer. Having sacked O’Neill who was one a one year rolling contract they found themselves having to give him just over a mill in a pay off. Having thankfully **** off Houllier they found themselves having to pay him in excess of 3mill in a pay off due to having given him a 3 year deal.

Armed with the above what do they do? They give McLeish a 3 year deal. It is bad enough they appointed McLeish but like Houllier to give him a three year deal was madness.

They never sacked O'Neill.

Nope the position become untenable and Martin got paid off in court.

[kidlewis]

To be fair in the last 2 years we've lost Milner young downing and Barry before.

You only need to look at arsenal since they lost Henry vieira and now fabregas. They've won sod all and lost to blues in a cup final.

What we need is to get a midfield as a cohesive unit.

[markavfc40]

You’d think a penny might of dropped for Lerner/Falkner over the summer. Having sacked O’Neill who was one a one year rolling contract they found themselves having to give him just over a mill in a pay off. Having thankfully **** off Houllier they found themselves having to pay him in excess of 3mill in a pay off due to having given him a 3 year deal.

Armed with the above what do they do? They give McLeish a 3 year deal. It is bad enough they appointed McLeish but like Houllier to give him a three year deal was madness.

They never sacked O'Neill.

They did sack O'Neill. But that in this instance its totally besides the point. O'Neill on a one year rolling contract got a pay off of just over a mill, Houllier on a 3 year deal took in excess of 3 mill in a pay off.

Why the **** Lerner put McLeish on a 3 year deal is total **** madness especially given how much he pissed up the wall on Houllier. A lesson should have been learned and he should have been put on a one year rolling contract and then if he **** up he could be sacked for a relatively small pay off.

[Big_John_10]

The guy is a complete failure when it comes to running sports team.

Hope he **** off soon.

[Mantis]

You’d think a penny might of dropped for Lerner/Falkner over the summer. Having sacked O’Neill who was one a one year rolling contract they found themselves having to give him just over a mill in a pay off. Having thankfully **** off Houllier they found themselves having to pay him in excess of 3mill in a pay off due to having given him a 3 year deal.

Armed with the above what do they do? They give McLeish a 3 year deal. It is bad enough they appointed McLeish but like Houllier to give him a three year deal was madness.

They never sacked O'Neill.

They did sack O'Neill. But that in this instance its totally besides the point. O'Neill on a one year rolling contract got a pay off of just over a mill, Houllier on a 3 year deal took in excess of 3 mill in a pay off.

Why the **** Lerner put McLeish on a 3 year deal is total **** madness especially given how much he pissed up the wall on Houllier. A lesson should have been learned and he should have been put on a one year rolling contract and then if he **** up he could be sacked for a relatively small pay off.

No, they didn't sack him

However, I agree completely with regards to the contract. That said, McLeish should never have been hired in the first place.

[thejoker]

I want McLeish gone, but with Randy choosing his replacement, it fills me with dread because of who he'll come up with next.

[thejoker]

One thing I don't get about Randy is his sudden change of policy. He hired Houllier to add some flair to us, so we started the transition with Makoun and Bent (and supposedly Cabaye last summer) to help us become a modern slick passing team. Then Houllier leaves, Randy decides we've got no money again and he gets another British 'long ball' manager. So we're left with surplus players (on high wages) from the previous regime to try and get rid of again....basically what I'm saying is that Randy is clueless!

[Tayls]

I dont want Randy to leave but he needs to act now. The playing staff are losing it and its only going to get worse. He needs to act now and bring someone in who is going to bring some bloody passion to the team, someone who knows how to set teams up for a win every week without it being a **** surprise when we do eventually win before it is too late. Summer could be an actual disaster.

6 wins in 24, coupled with two shit cup runs - sort it out, or lose the fans completely.

[Villarocker]

Maybe Randy is following Mike Ashley's example?

He came in and spent big - Ashley did the same at NUFC.

He then got rid of the "Messiah" by stopping the flow of cash - Ashley did similar with Keegan.

He has then gone on to sell our prize assets - Ashley has recouped money through sales of stars at NUFC (Carroll, Enrique).

Maybe Randy got in McLeish to take us down so that we can get rid of the big earners off our books and then rebuild to come back up - Ashley's NUFC did that and now look where they are!

The irony would be if we took the Blues manager again in order to do so - Hughton took NUFC back to the Premier League!

Seriously though; the fun has completely been taken away from us Villa fans. Randy came in and we all thought we would seriously be challenging for honours again. Now look at us! All doom and gloom and with an owner who doesn't seem to even want to know what we have to say. We don't even know if there is any kind of plan for our future. When he came there seem to be some kind of idea as to what we wanted but now we get told nothing.

[jacketspuds]

Out of interest is this the 5th year of the mythical "5-year plan"? Just curious because it will be quite an achievement to pump hundreds of millions of pounds into a club to try and get them in the Champions League, and they end up in the Championship instead.

[MMFy]

In the beginning there was the '5-year plan'. We were fighting fit and heading in the right direction, finding ourselves in the top 4 in March for O'Neill's last two seasons.

But - due to O'Neill's strange transfer policy of signing squad players, we never had the strength in depth in the squad to make critical substitutions/rotations when the first choice XI were universally tiring. At this point, we needed another CM that was better than Sidwell and we needed a striker. We really needed a striker. And we signed one that has a long record of NOT scoring goals.

I cannot begin to understand O'Neill. He spent £120m (gross) and his net spend on strikers was £0. If we had signed Darren Bent in January 2009 or January 2010, I am confident we would have achieved that coveted top four spot at the cost of Liverpool or maybe even Arsenal. The extra income for achieving that top four spot would have given us the opportunity to sign another CM and strengthen the squad, while trimming the fat. Or not signing Habib Beye.

We would have also kept hold of Barry, which could have been the catalyst to keeping Milner, then inevitably Young and Downing, who I still firmly believe would be a good enough midfield four to maintain top four. Ultimately - I believe not having the strength in depth in the squad in the last 18 months on O'Neill's tenure reduced the quality of the squad.

We were so close, I think O'Neill and Lerner thought we would be able to get past the post with that XI. But no XI is going to get you anywhere in this league. This is a massively more physical game that the 14 players we used in out last league-winning season, and I could not see, for O'Neill's last 18 months, O'Neill himself recognising that the players were tiring around March. This could not be better demonstrated than by reviewing O'Neill's record for games played in March during his tenure.

We needed that CM and a striker to add a different dimension to the team when we were tiring or becoming predictable. Instead it was an embarrassing descent we witnessed, two seasons back to back. And this is where it started to go wrong.

The five year plan has been seemingly abandoned. The most frustrating thing about this is that there is no backup plan. Nothing at all.

It is generally accepted that When the Arabs bought Man City the rules of the game were changed. However, I firmly believe that this is also bollocks.

SPURS: At the same time we were on the rise, Spurs were doing the same thing with the same efficiency. The difference there is that they bought a balanced squad and less squad fillers who were not good enough for even cameo appearances. Hate him or hate him, candleface has made wise additions to a balanced squad at Spuds.

LIVERPOOL: The club were a total laughing stock in the latter days of the Hicks/Gillett era, and we had finished above them that season. They were there for the taking, yet we failed to grasp it. I have to question Lerner for not recognising and acting on this opportunity.

ARSENAL: Some questionable signings, some Arsenal fans calling for Wenger to be sacked, they have now been, for about three seasons, a team there for the taking. They have stagnated badly and are not nailed on for top four finishes any more.

So, the five year plan was replaces with nothing. We have gone from a team that could have been a very serious challenger for the top four/six to a team that looks like it is going to stagnate. Man City moved the goalposts as far as being able to buy success, yet the balance was already shifting from two of the regular top four teams.

I believe if we had signed a striker like Darren Bent instead of Ivanhoe, we would have secured the coveted top four spot, maintained the squad and established ourselves as Spuds have done.

Unfortunately I believe as a result of O'Neill's actions/inaction, we are seeing the domino effect of losing our best players season after season, and the steady disarrangement of what was a plan for success.

Employing McLeish is a decision I don't think any of us will ever understand and is heading in exactly the opposite direction of where we should be going. A manager with a proven record for relegation is not a manager that would get such a high profile job in any other industry. An absolute joke. I will not forgive him for the line-up/formation for the Spuds game, playing to keep the score down. He should have been sacked for that alone.

It's a good job there are a lot of shit teams in the league this year because it may be the only thing that stops us getting relegated. However, we are not clear yet. We need at least three more wins this season, yet our performances are so unpredictable I can't see where they are going to come from.

So, we have gone from 'the five year plan', 'proud history, bright future' to nothing. Communication has failed. Results are failing. The future looks pretty shit from where I'm sitting.

I'm not an O'Neill fan, I believe he was one-dimensional, predictable and limited, but we have undone 4 years (of the 5 year plan) of fairly good work in 18 months.

Good work Randy.

[Robbie09]

In the beginning there was the '5-year plan'. We were fighting fit and heading in the right direction, finding ourselves in the top 4 in March for O'Neill's last two seasons.

But - due to O'Neill's strange transfer policy of signing squad players, we never had the strength in depth in the squad to make critical substitutions/rotations when the first choice XI were universally tiring. At this point, we needed another CM that was better than Sidwell and we needed a striker. We really needed a striker. And we signed one that has a long record of NOT scoring goals.

I cannot begin to understand O'Neill. He spent £120m (gross) and his net spend on strikers was £0. If we had signed Darren Bent in January 2009 or January 2010, I am confident we would have achieved that coveted top four spot at the cost of Liverpool or maybe even Arsenal. The extra income for achieving that top four spot would have given us the opportunity to sign another CM and strengthen the squad, while trimming the fat. Or not signing Habib Beye.

We would have also kept hold of Barry, which could have been the catalyst to keeping Milner, then inevitably Young and Downing, who I still firmly believe would be a good enough midfield four to maintain top four. Ultimately - I believe not having the strength in depth in the squad in the last 18 months on O'Neill's tenure reduced the quality of the squad.

We were so close, I think O'Neill and Lerner thought we would be able to get past the post with that XI. But no XI is going to get you anywhere in this league. This is a massively more physical game that the 14 players we used in out last league-winning season, and I could not see, for O'Neill's last 18 months, O'Neill himself recognising that the players were tiring around March. This could not be better demonstrated than by reviewing O'Neill's record for games played in March during his tenure.

We needed that CM and a striker to add a different dimension to the team when we were tiring or becoming predictable. Instead it was an embarrassing descent we witnessed, two seasons back to back. And this is where it started to go wrong.

The five year plan has been seemingly abandoned. The most frustrating thing about this is that there is no backup plan. Nothing at all.

It is generally accepted that When the Arabs bought Man City the rules of the game were changed. However, I firmly believe that this is also bollocks.

SPURS: At the same time we were on the rise, Spurs were doing the same thing with the same efficiency. The difference there is that they bought a balanced squad and less squad fillers who were not good enough for even cameo appearances. Hate him or hate him, candleface has made wise additions to a balanced squad at Spuds.

LIVERPOOL: The club were a total laughing stock in the latter days of the Hicks/Gillett era, and we had finished above them that season. They were there for the taking, yet we failed to grasp it. I have to question Lerner for not recognising and acting on this opportunity.

ARSENAL: Some questionable signings, some Arsenal fans calling for Wenger to be sacked, they have now been, for about three seasons, a team there for the taking. They have stagnated badly and are not nailed on for top four finishes any more.

So, the five year plan was replaces with nothing. We have gone from a team that could have been a very serious challenger for the top four/six to a team that looks like it is going to stagnate. Man City moved the goalposts as far as being able to buy success, yet the balance was already shifting from two of the regular top four teams.

I believe if we had signed a striker like Darren Bent instead of Ivanhoe, we would have secured the coveted top four spot, maintained the squad and established ourselves as Spuds have done.

Unfortunately I believe as a result of O'Neill's actions/inaction, we are seeing the domino effect of losing our best players season after season, and the steady disarrangement of what was a plan for success.

Employing McLeish is a decision I don't think any of us will ever understand and is heading in exactly the opposite direction of where we should be going. A manager with a proven record for relegation is not a manager that would get such a high profile job in any other industry. An absolute joke. I will not forgive him for the line-up/formation for the Spuds game, playing to keep the score down. He should have been sacked for that alone.

It's a good job there are a lot of shit teams in the league this year because it may be the only thing that stops us getting relegated. However, we are not clear yet. We need at least three more wins this season, yet our performances are so unpredictable I can't see where they are going to come from.

So, we have gone from 'the five year plan', 'proud history, bright future' to nothing. Communication has failed. Results are failing. The future looks pretty shit from where I'm sitting.

I'm not an O'Neill fan, I believe he was one-dimensional, predictable and limited, but we have undone 4 years (of the 5 year plan) of fairly good work in 18 months.

Good work Randy.

Great post. Can I add we shouldn't forget Faulkner's role in the recent demise.

[MMFy]

Can I add we shouldn't forget Faulkner's role in the recent demise.

Indeed you can, Sir, but I do not feel sacking/removing Faulkner would do anything to solve the problem.

The club under Randy's guidance at the moment is like a formula one team with no research & development department - it's not going to stagnate, it is inevitably going to fall behind the competition.

Given Randy's appointments so far, I'm not sure I would trust him to pick an adequate replacement.

[thetrees]

Can I add we shouldn't forget Faulkner's role in the recent demise.

Indeed you can, Sir, but I do not feel sacking/removing Faulkner would do anything to solve the problem.

The club under Randy's guidance at the moment is like a formula one team with no research & development department - it's not going to stagnate, it is inevitably going to fall behind the competition.

Given Randy's appointments so far, I'm not sure I would trust him to pick an adequate replacement.

An interesting original posting, and the addition of Faulkner into the mix.

Faulkner was the guy who got rid of O'Neill, which makes him evil in the eyes of many, or astute in the eyes of some.

As I stated before, Faulkner may well have saved Mr Lerner and the club from O'Neill. It remains to be seen whether he can save Mr Lerner from himself.

[smetrov]

Can I add we shouldn't forget Faulkner's role in the recent demise.

An interesting original posting, and the addition of Faulkner into the mix.

Faulkner was the guy who got rid of O'Neill, which makes him evil in the eyes of many, or astute in the eyes of some.

As I stated before, Faulkner may well have saved Mr Lerner and the club from O'Neill. It remains to be seen whether he can save Mr Lerner from himself.

What hell does that mean ? Can 'Faulkner save Lerner from himself'

Far to clever for me to understand

[TRO]

I want McLeish gone, but with Randy choosing his replacement, it fills me with dread because of who he'll come up with next.

...Steve Bruce.lol

[Richard]

I want McLeish gone, but with Randy choosing his replacement, it fills me with dread because of who he'll come up with next.

...Steve Bruce.lol

Not even worth joking about. I do not want Bruce at all but even he would be able to get better results than Mcleish

[AVFCforever1991]

So who would you guys prefer lerner go for if he had to choose either Bruce or keep Mcleish?