The Randy Lerner thread

[dukes]

I think there are quite a few people out there that the club would be very smart to bring onto the board in some capacity, such as Brian Little, John Gregory, Graham Taylor, that could really help in terms of bringing more football nous. For example, Gregory would be excellent to bring in and use as almost the figurehead for the entire board. It is just blatantly obvious the footballing know how isn't there and is what hurts us.

I have had the honour of spending some time with Brian Little, he would be an excellent voice of reason to the board, and still holds the club very close to his heart.

[ozvillafan]

If you believe it was MON irresponsible spending, in reality it was all about the monetary controls or lack of them which was all down to Lerner. With hindsight he realised Fitzgerald was right but it was too late and he had blown hundreds of millions!

We are now suffering because Lerner had loads of money but not enough and BECAUSE he had absolutely NO business acumen.

Good post, Mike (only quoted some to save space)

You are quite right about MON - he only spent what he was allowed to spend. The blame for having players on high wages is down to Lerner and his lack of financial control.

Having said that, he is not to blame for the lack of quality in the squad. He doesn't pick the team nor the players we are trying to lure to the club - that's the manager and scouts job - he is just responsible for their contracts.

[LockStockVilla]

I have had the honour of spending some time with Brian Little, he would be an excellent voice of reason to the board, and still holds the club very close to his heart.

So I have heard from quite a few! I'd love him and Gregory involved in some capacity. I have a lot of time for the two and they both definitely care about Aston Villa.

[Spoony]

The thing is with Lerner is he HAS invested a lot in the club. Yes he has made some bad decisions and sanctioned some damn stupid deals, but if he hadn't we would probably all complain that he is 'too interfering'. Obviously for managerial choices he is to blame, but we were all on board with Lambert and he HAS backed him.

I don't think Lerner deserves the stick he gets.

[TRO]

The thing is with Lerner is he HAS invested a lot in the club. Yes he has made some bad decisions and sanctioned some damn stupid deals, but if he hadn't we would probably all complain that he is 'too interfering'. Obviously for managerial choices he is to blame, but we were all on board with Lambert and he HAS backed him.

I don't think Lerner deserves the stick he gets.

I don't believe Lerner is the main fault behind why we are where we are.

His stewardship is not blameless and there are many things to point to.... I too felt Richard Fitzgeralds departure was dubious and that he had visions for quality to be recruited which seemed to rock the boat at the time.

Recent successive managers have bought players for inflated prices and we have simply got very little on the field from them..... thats why we are in this mess.

Players of arguably better quality were purchased under the control of HDE that was more down to the managers of the day than HDE.

[MikeMcKenna]

The thing is with Lerner is he HAS invested a lot in the club. Yes he has made some bad decisions and sanctioned some damn stupid deals, but if he hadn't we would probably all complain that he is 'too interfering'. Obviously for managerial choices he is to blame, but we were all on board with Lambert and he HAS backed him.

I don't think Lerner deserves the stick he gets.

But running a football club successfully is not just about giving managers unfettered backing and having no plan beyond qualify for CL or bust. There has to be a business plan which allows for various eventualities and financial controls. It didn't take a genius to realise that we would be in the shit if salaries exceeded income. Yes the managers sign the players but Lerner signed the cheques.

In many ways Ellis and Lerner show how their two extreme & opposite approaches were equally flawed. Ellis interfered constantly and controlled every aspect of money down to petty cash but put in no money of his own. He ran the club to boost his own ego and failed to invest when it was needed.

Lerner who acts like a recluse spouting stuff like "i'm just the custodian and the fans really own the club", started well by appointing a very professional executive board, took a very hands off approach but told them they had nothing to do with the main financial outgoings: player fees & salaries. When things on the pitch were going well he allowed MON to offer crazy salaries, then woke up one day to realise he was down £150-£200 million and realised he couldn't allow it to continue. Then he appoints a novice as CEO, in a panic brings in strict financial controls and watches us spiral down to the current position.

Edited January 14, 2013 by MikeMcKenna

[Harry]

I posted this in another thread but as it is primarily about Randy Lerner i think it should be here also.....

In my opinion the rot started back in 2007 and had fully set in by January 2008. Things were very rosy on the playing side but off the field it wasn't so good - there was no business planning or financial controls. The then CEO was a very accomplished guy; Richard Fitzgerald. Prior to Aston Villa, FitzGerald worked for 18 years in various senior roles at IMG. They included chief operating officer and head of New Media of TWI, the world’s largest independent producer and distributor of sports TV programmes. In other words he had experience and a great track record as a senior executive. However in January 2008, after just 13 months at Villa, having been appointed on merit etc, he suddenly "resigned". I was told by someone who was definitely ITK at the time, that Fitzgerald was trying to bring in proper business planning and financial controls. However MON saw it as "interference" - Lerner agreed, Fitzgerald "resigned" with immediate effect receiving £775,000 in compensation.

FitzGerald on leaving Villa for several months worked as a consultant to the owners of Manchester City FC. In August 2008 he was appointed as CEO for Racing UK where he is still now.

Lets be clear, Lerner needed a commercial guy like Fitzgerald for business & financial planning, as he didn't (still doesn't) have this experience himself or the neccessary business skills. He should have had a joined up plan that forecast various outcomes however.....

He decided to wing it and hope that MON could achieve CL qualification. He had no Plan B if the gamble failed.

As late as April 2010 in an interview with The Independent he said:

"The way Martin [O'Neill] has developed the team, though – and the investment we've made in our training ground – should give us an honest shot at competing."

Very shortly after we were out of the FA Cup and had failed to achieve a CL place. In May Lerner appointed the 32 year old (then) Paul Faulkner, the former MBNA Relationship Manager, who described himself as a "football geek" but had no experience as a senior board level executive or track record that merited his appointment other than being someone of whom Lerner said:

""Paul was someone I could talk to about ideas and who could then go about putting those ideas into action," says Lerner. "He enjoyed the abstract: thinking about how to grow and how to develop a culture within a business."

So he made him boss of his plaything Aston Villa FC and then reputedly MON was informed that Faulkner would work with him on future player financial dealings, setting budgets and negotiating fees and salaries. And that players had to be sold but that only a limited amount of the proceeds could be used for player purchases. The rest is history; MON walked claiming constructively dismissal due to breach of contract and was paid a sizeable amount of compensation.

If you believe it was MON irresponsible spending, in reality it was all about the monetary controls or lack of them which was all down to Lerner. With hindsight he realised Fitzgerald was right but it was too late and he had blown hundreds of millions!

We are now suffering because Lerner had loads of money but not enough and BECAUSE he had absolutely NO business acumen.

Good post which I think is 100% true.

[TRO]

Good post which I think is 100% true.

I too think Mike makes some very valid points that can't be scoffed at.

Me .. I believe all footbal clubs make mistakes of a similar kind you mention.

so for me the main problem has been signing too many players that have not worked for us.

before anyone says it, yes all clubs buy duff players.....The ones like us who simply buy too many.....PAY THE ULTIMATE PRICE EVENTUALLY.

I too think Mike makes some very valid points that can't be scoffed at.

Me .. I believe all footbal clubs make mistakes of a similar kind thats mentioned.

so for me the main problem has been signing too many players that have not worked for us.

before anyone says it, yes all clubs buy duff players.....The ones like us who simply buy too many.....PAY THE ULTIMATE PRICE EVENTUALLY.

[MikeMcKenna]

Good post, Mike (only quoted some to save space)

You are quite right about MON - he only spent what he was allowed to spend. The blame for having players on high wages is down to Lerner and his lack of financial control.

Having said that, he is not to blame for the lack of quality in the squad. He doesn't pick the team nor the players we are trying to lure to the club - that's the manager and scouts job - he is just responsible for their contracts.

I accept that he didn't select players but he must have had an inkling that not everyone MON (etc) signed would turn out to a good signing or did he believe at the time like many fans that MON was the "Messiah" and capable of miracles? Personally, joking aside, I do think he was carried away by MON.

At the end of the 09/10 season he still had complete faith in him saying:

"Martin will be back next year managing. It has already been settled. He and I spoke on a number of occasions in person and over the phone. Yesterday I dragged him out of a series of meetings with chief executive Paul Faulkner trying to get plans for the summer underway. We feel very good about that because it represents continuity for the players and in many other ways.

He was totally clueless, had no idea of the storm about to break.

[MikeMcKenna]

I too think Mike makes some very valid points that can't be scoffed at.

Me .. I believe all footbal clubs make mistakes of a similar kind you mention.

so for me the main problem has been signing too many players that have not worked for us.

before anyone says it, yes all clubs buy duff players.....The ones like us who simply buy too many.....PAY THE ULTIMATE PRICE EVENTUALLY.

TRO how then do you square that with the fact that Lerner still had total faith in MON at the end of the 9/10 season?. I don't accept the generalisation about MON buying players who lacked quality but lets say I accept a very good argument can be made; Lerner clearly didn't agree when he told us : "Martin will be back next year managing. It has already been settled. [...]Yesterday I dragged him out of a series of meetings with chief executive Paul Faulkner trying to get plans for the summer underway"

If what you say is true Lerner should have been questioning MONs ability to bring in the right players at the right prices and right wages. Don't forget the salaries were already out of control.

Edited January 14, 2013 by MikeMcKenna

[ozvillafan]

I accept that he didn't select players but he must have had an inkling that not everyone MON (etc) signed would turn out to a good signing or did he believe at the time like many fans that MON was the "Messiah" and capable of miracles? Personally, joking aside, I do think he was carried away by MON.

At the end of the 09/10 season he still had complete faith in him saying:

"Martin will be back next year managing. It has already been settled. He and I spoke on a number of occasions in person and over the phone. Yesterday I dragged him out of a series of meetings with chief executive Paul Faulkner trying to get plans for the summer underway. We feel very good about that because it represents continuity for the players and in many other ways.

He was totally clueless, had no idea of the storm about to break.

I can't argue on that one. Yes, he put way too much faith in MON and got burnt.

And the whole "he doesn't know football" allegation that pops up from time to time also rings true.

That doesn't make him a bad owner, just a naive one. I think he's learned plenty from his years in charge and some of the mistakes he has made.

But our current predicament, imo, is not entirely his fault. I don't believe for a second he limited our transfer targets to lower leagues or foreign players. That would have been Lambert's choice.

[Big_John_10]

But our current predicament, imo, is not entirely his fault. I don't believe for a second he limited our transfer targets to lower leagues or foreign players. That would have been Lambert's choice.

Lambert's choice based on the amount of wages he could offer.

I mean seriously, what do people think the 4 lower league lads are on?

[sharkyvilla]

I accept that he didn't select players but he must have had an inkling that not everyone MON (etc) signed would turn out to a good signing or did he believe at the time like many fans that MON was the "Messiah" and capable of miracles? Personally, joking aside, I do think he was carried away by MON.

At the end of the 09/10 season he still had complete faith in him saying:

"Martin will be back next year managing. It has already been settled. He and I spoke on a number of occasions in person and over the phone. Yesterday I dragged him out of a series of meetings with chief executive Paul Faulkner trying to get plans for the summer underway. We feel very good about that because it represents continuity for the players and in many other ways.

He was totally clueless, had no idea of the storm about to break.

O'Neill is such an intense character and I'm sure if you work with him he can be very persuasive. That's always been one of his strengths as a manager but also his inflexibility is a weakness and he has never managed to leave a legacy at a club he has worked at. That stops him being a great manager that could have ended up at one of the 'big' clubs. It's a shame that as a Villa employee O'Neill was unable to work under the new financial constraints that Lerner was having to impose and decided to walk out instead. Operating under a financial system where you have to sell your best players for big profit like we did and reinvesting the money to build a new squad is a viable option and displays management skills that unfortunately O'Neill didn't fancy and the managers since then have failed to succeed in. That's probably the biggest reason we are in such a mess.

[mykeyb]

Lambert's choice based on the amount of wages he could offer.

I mean seriously, what do people think the 4 lower league lads are on?

I think is a point being missed by many on here. yes he had £20 million but he was severely limited on his targets because of the new wage structure in place.

[ozvillafan]

Lambert's choice based on the amount of wages he could offer.

I mean seriously, what do people think the 4 lower league lads are on?

That's an assumption you are making.

While it is true that some of our players are overpaid, our squad was (is?) more expensive than Everton and Spurs. I don't see their squads full of lower league players.

Quality players from the Premier League exist that will fit into our wage structure just as they do for other clubs. In fact, we made a move for one in the last window (Dempsey).

[choffer]

Interesting article here: http://howtosolveaproblemlikeastonvilla.blogspot.co.uk/?m=1

JAN

13

How To Solve A Problem Like Aston Villa

It’s the 28th February 2010 and as the final whistle goes at Wembley, Aston Villa lose the League Cup Final to Manchester United. Villa sit 7th in the Premier League table, but crucially only 4 points behind fourth placed Tottenham Hotspur with two games in hand and an FA Cup Quarter Final against Reading the following weekend. Seems like a lifetime ago doesn’t it? But yet it was less than three years. That defeat was painful at the time, but has become all the more significant over recent years, as it marked the start of the decline of Villa to where we find ourselves now, third from bottom and facing an uphill battle to retain the Premier League status we’ve so often taken for granted. The momentum built up by Martin O’Neill and Randy Lerner seemed to vanish with that defeat; the slow, brutal realisation that for all the investment and hard work, this Villa were destined to be another ‘nearly team’. What’s happened since then has been a catalogue of personal errors, naive mis-management and bad luck. So what went wrong, and how do we salvage something from this horrible nadir of a season?

As a supporter, it’s tough to step back and take a logical, impartial look. But amongst all the hand wringing, booing and angst I feel it’s important someone tries to. We need to assess the club from top-to-bottom to see how we allowed this to happen, and how it can be fixed, and quickly. Let’s start with the group that most Villa supporters are blaming for our current predicament: the board.

The most common accusation from supporters (and recently sections of the media) is that Randy Lerner hasn’t invested the requisite amount of money to make Villa competitive. Unfortunately, this just isn’t true. Under O’Neill, Lerner’s net spend was just under £82 million on transfer fees alone. Since then, although we’ve sold Downing, Young and Milner for big fees (£20m, £17m & £18m) we’ve also signed Bent (£24m), Makoun (£6m), N’Zogbia (£7m), Given (£5m) & Benteke (£7m) whilst recouping virtually nothing. When added to the colossal wages we are paying to at least 4 of those listed (plus Warnock, Dunne, Hutton & Ireland – still on our books), the one thing Randy cannot be blamed for is not wanting to invest more money. Try and think of this entirely from a business perspective for a second; what has Lerner got to show for his investments? Even the most optimistic Villa fan would say we’re only as good as when he bought the club, so how has this happened, despite Spurs only spending roughly a net £10 million and Everton turning a marginal profit on transfer fees over the same period?

Sadly, despite all the investment the club has been grossly mis-managed at the top level. To illustrate this, we need to look at the managers we’ve had in that time, and how they’ve been allowed to run the club.

Lerner’s first, and arguably biggest mistake, at Villa was to allow the club to be run to the whims of Martin O’Neill. It’s one most of us would have made, and when we were challenging for the Top 4 and reaching Wembley, very few of us complained about it. But in the cold light of day, O’Neill wasted our best shot of the modern era. Look at these transfer fees; £3.5 million for Zat Knight; £3.5 million for Marlon Harewood; £8.5 million for Nigel Reo-Coker; £10 million for Curtis Davies; £4 million for Nicky Shorey; £5 million for Luke Young; £5.5 million for Steve Sidwell; £7.5 million for Carlos Cuellar; £6 million for Fabian Delph; £3 million for Habib Beye; £7 million for Stephen Warnock. All awarded highly paid long-term contracts on the advice of O’Neill, and all allowed to leave for virtually nothing. Meanwhile, Gary Cahill and Craig Gardner, two players we really could benefit from now, were allowed to leave cheaply. When Lerner eventually demanded O’Neill curbed his spending, he left us in the lurch days before the start of the season, taking his team with him and leaving the club with no contingency plan in place (he barely bothered playing kids and didn’t establish a scouting network as an alternative transfer policy).

But this isn’t a witch-hunt against O’Neill, nor am I blaming him for all our problems. The club was a mess when he arrived, and largely through sheer force of personality he transformed the club in his image, bringing with it a level of success unlikely to be surpassed at Villa Park for a very long time. Yes, he had certain managerial failings (tactically inflexible, inability to keep his squad fresh) that perhaps prevented us from doing even better, but I think most supporters will look back at performances on the pitch and the growth of the club under O’Neill very fondly.

O’Neill’s departure undoubtedly burned Lerner, and it’s easy to see now why Gerard Houllier appealed to him at the time. It was clear to most of us that a different approach was needed if Villa were to sustain our level of ‘success’ without continuing to spend huge amounts of money. Here was an experienced manager, with a broad knowledge of the global game who would establish the things the real top clubs have in place: worldwide scouting networks, a strong youth policy and tactical flexibility that had been ‘the missing pieces’ of the O’Neill era. Houllier’s problem was pragmatism (a word that’ll come up again and again throughout this piece), he tried to inflict too much change on a team not susceptible to his methods too quickly and his reign was charred with in fighting and dissent from players and supporters. Unfortunately, performances and results started to improve before his health scare caused him to leave the club in the summer. Again, Lerner had backed his man (to the tune of £30 million in less than 12 months) and again, he was left looking for a new manager.

With the benefit of hindsight now, the board at Aston Villa obviously took account of the tensions of Houllier’s tenure and tried to rectify them by appointing a manager who would be more in-tune with the senior players at the club. Although it’s also clear that any manager who took charge of Aston Villa at this time would have to improve the club without significant financial backing. It’s possible that from the candidates that fitted the boards profile, and that were crucially willing to work within the restrictions imposed upon them, that Alex McLeish was the only manager who would take the job, but it was doomed to fail from the start. We could talk about the Birmingham City connections all day, and despite our protestations otherwise, it clearly riled some supporters, and however, my main problem with Big Eck was that his appointment was clearly a short-term solution to what was rapidly becoming a long-term problem. Eight months on from his departure, I think we can see that McLeish actually was trying to be pragmatic about Villa’s situation, trying to get a competitive team on the field by cutting costs, but his dour football and backs-to-the-wall tactics were never going to be a long term fix to Aston Villa’s problems. I begrudgingly now applaud him for keeping us in the league under the circumstances but regard his reign as Randy’s big failure. We spent a year frantically treading water, and allowed a number of more forward thinking, progressive, smaller (no disrespect intended) clubs to catch up with us. And now we find ourselves under Paul Lambert in the situation we are now. We’ll discuss him separately later.

The common accusation against the board is that by cutting costs we’ve allowed quality players to leave the club to be replaced by inferior ones. This is only partially true. Yes, we have failed to replace the players that have left the club adequately, but this is as much down to poor signings by the managers and the constant changing of managers: one plan starts, it doesn’t yield immediate success and the manager is replaced, leaving the players he bought in to fall to the wayside. The board got carried away with O’Neill, were unlucky with Houllier and got it totally wrong with McLeish. So why have we allowed this to happen (and spent another small fortune doing so – we’ve spent more on hiring and firing managers since 2010 than any club in Europe bar Chelsea)? It’s here that another of Randy’s big failings becomes apparent. He knows virtually nothing about football, so why the absence of a football man on the board? As Villa’s fortunes have waned, Randy has become more and more entrenched with those he knows, when a genuine football advisor could have saved him from the McLeish debacle at least. The O’Neill and Houllier eras clearly burnt him, but by closing himself off he’s increased the risk that his time at Villa will eventually be doomed to failure.

One last point on the board is that most of us as supporters are rational, logical people. We want what’s best for Aston Villa more than anything, and we understand that throwing money at it is not going to help in the long term. But what is the plan? As a successful businessman Randy must have one, so why not communicate that with the supporters? If it’s to break even and then spend again the great, if it’s to run the club as a successful, profitable business then we understand (although relegation certainly won’t help so they are going about this the wrong way in my opinion), if it’s to recoup costs and then sell, then thanks for being honest and at least we will know why some of the more baffling decisions have been made. The silence from the club has been one of the more distasteful aspects of Lerner’s time at Villa, and many supporters feel now like they are being treated as idiots by their own club. That doesn’t make for a healthy environment for anyone at the club, particularly the young players struggling to get points on the board.

Which leads us to where we are now. I think most supporters were pleased with the appointment of Paul Lambert in the close season. Here was a young manager who’d had great success in the lower leagues and a fantastic first year in the Premier League with Norwich City, and who combined a steely, O’Neill like aura with a wider knowledge of the game from time spent playing and coaching in Germany. We accepted that the club had to change, and most were cautiously pleased with the signings made in the summer (I for one had long lamented the policy of buying proven Premier League players who commanded big wages when other teams seemed to find bargains on the continent and in the lower leagues) and despite a less than auspicious start it seemed finally like there was a long term plan in place to turn the club around. After a sizeable unbeaten run, capped by tremendous away wins at Carrow Road and Anfield, it seemed like it was a plan that was slowly coming to fruition too. And then Christmas happened, and I’m writing on the back of the worst run of results I’ve ever known at the club, whilst we sit in the bottom three contemplating the prospect of a spanking at The Hawthorns next weekend (one of those well run, progressive, ‘smaller’ clubs I’ve already mentioned). Confidence is gone, performances are awful and yesterday seemed like a new nadir because Lambert didn’t seem to know what to do, culminating in desperate substitutions that seemed to amount to putting on every available striker and hoping one of them does something. It’s not going to work I’m afraid, Paul.

So where do we go from here? Well, let’s not get too hasty. Sacking Lambert is not the answer. His long-term plan is sound, even if in the short term relegation looks more likely with every passing week. Plus, as we’ve ascertained already, the major reason the club is in such a dire situation is because of the constant chopping and changing of the manager and a distinct lack of long-term vision and continuity. We constantly compare ourselves to Everton, and the reason for their relative success is continuity. They have a good manager that they allow to manage the club within its restrictions. I still believe Lambert can do the same for us.

Lambert said yesterday that our current predicament is “nothing to do with having inexperienced players.” Crucially, he’s only partially right. The transfer policy is the correct one, and in Lowton, Westwood and Benteke he’s bought three potentially top players to the club at relatively cheap prices. If Villa fans think we’re going to go out and sign Lescott and Parker this January, then they are sadly misguided. Look at it like this: Why would their clubs sell them in January? If they would, why wouldn’t the rest of the Premier League want to sign them (we’re not Martin O’Neill’s Aston Villa anymore, we’re not even the Aston Villa Darren Bent joined. We don’t have that pulling power sadly)? And if they will be sold, and no one better off than us wants them, are we just repeating the mistakes of the past by paying players past their peak big wages and affording them the inevitable long contracts? Any players that fit all the criteria and our wage structure will be inferior footballers to the ones we have already. I’m sorry, but that’s just wasting money again.

But I said that Lambert’s assessment was only ‘partially correct’, because that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t utilise the experienced players we do have. I also said earlier that pragmatism would come up again, and I see this as Lambert’s big failing. His treatment of Warnock and Hutton has been impetuous at best. Even accepting their poor performances last season, not utilising two players that the club is still paying good money to when results and performances have been dire is wasteful. They are not the long-term future of Aston Villa, no, but no one can question their commitment, they will work hard to achieve results for the club and take some of the burden off the young players at the same time. Plus by not playing them but still paying them we are literally throwing money we’re constantly told we don’t have down the drain. More wastage at a club that’s had far too much. On a similar note, we aren’t scoring any goals yet have an international goalscorer at the club failing to get a game. Pick him, play to his strengths, and that’s one problem we won’t have to worry about anymore. It might even add a few million to his valuation should we choose to sell him in the summer.

Tactically too, Lambert’s ‘idealism’ is costing us dearly. When times are tough, and particularly with young, inexperienced players at the club, we must go back to basics. Our expansive, attacking style of football is not yielding goals, and is leaving an inexperienced defence lacking confidence woefully exposed (Joe Bennett had a stinker at Bradford, but how often was he left on his own against two men?) and a light-weight midfield with too much work to do. Play to the strengths of the good players we have, protect against the weaknesses of those we don’t. I’m not advocating a return to the dour negativity of McLeish, but (it’s that word again), be pragmatic. O’Neill was criticesed for being tactically inflexible, but the situation then was totally, utterly different. Were he in charge now, he’d sort out this mess in the short term very quickly. It was illustrated best by QPR’s game against Spurs yesterday. Despite being on the back-foot they cut off the space behind that Spurs thrive on and secured a valuable point. At 0-0 against the same opposition and despite us too being on the back-foot, we made attacking substitutions, opened the game up and played into the hands of a much better team. Pragmatism again I’m afraid. I would personally advocate a return to 4-4-2. It’s familiar to players, it protects the full-backs and it allows us to play our most dangerous players in their best positions. We’re currently trying to play like Chelsea with players desperately short of that standard, and it’s weakening us. I would advocate a team of Given; Lowton, Warnock, Dunne, Vlaar; N’Zogbia, Holman, El Ahmadi, Westwood; Benteke & Bent when everyone is fit. Look at the teams around us; all would gladly swap their team for that one. Until everyone is fit, play that way; make ourselves hard to beat and give ourselves the best chance possible. If we can get everyone back we may not need to spend any money to save ourselves. Stop being stubborn Paul. We believe in your long-term vision, but right now you’re doing as much harm as good.

Which leads me to one more thing, us, the supporters. Don’t boo players right now. They are trying, it doesn’t help. Don’t sing for Gabby when he’s not on the pitch, he last played consistently well three years ago, he’s not the saviour. We can’t do much, but we can turn up in our thousands and help make Villa Park a difficult place to go again. We’ve got a responsibility to the club now. We can still stay in the division, and we can still get to Wembley, and until we can’t let’s at least do our bit. I know we’re hurt and frustrated, but realistically, what else can we do?

And for their part, it’s time for someone from the club to come and talk to us. Tell us what Randy wants to achieve and how he wants to achieve it. Don’t treat us like fools. You need us and we need you. A mob supporters meeting is not the answer, but a few of us will gladly give up our time to listen to the club, convey the thoughts of the supporters and relay your plans back. It can’t make relations any worse can it? We can still do this together, and build that ‘bright future’ we were mis-sold a few years ago. But we need to take the right steps now.

[sharkyvilla]

And that sums it up perfectly choffer

[pacbuddies]

That doesn't make him a bad owner, just a naive one.

Well actually being a 'naive owner' does make him a 'bad owner' as being 'naive' cannot result in him being a 'good owner'. There is no middle ground. He is either one or the other.

[Woodytom]

Interesting article here: http://howtosolveapr...spot.co.uk/?m=1

JAN

13

How To Solve A Problem Like Aston Villa

It’s the 28th February 2010 and as the final whistle goes at Wembley, Aston Villa lose the League Cup Final to Manchester United. Villa sit 7th in the Premier League table, but crucially only 4 points behind fourth placed Tottenham Hotspur with two games in hand and an FA Cup Quarter Final against Reading the following weekend. Seems like a lifetime ago doesn’t it? But yet it was less than three years. That defeat was painful at the time, but has become all the more significant over recent years, as it marked the start of the decline of Villa to where we find ourselves now, third from bottom and facing an uphill battle to retain the Premier League status we’ve so often taken for granted. The momentum built up by Martin O’Neill and Randy Lerner seemed to vanish with that defeat; the slow, brutal realisation that for all the investment and hard work, this Villa were destined to be another ‘nearly team’. What’s happened since then has been a catalogue of personal errors, naive mis-management and bad luck. So what went wrong, and how do we salvage something from this horrible nadir of a season?

As a supporter, it’s tough to step back and take a logical, impartial look. But amongst all the hand wringing, booing and angst I feel it’s important someone tries to. We need to assess the club from top-to-bottom to see how we allowed this to happen, and how it can be fixed, and quickly. Let’s start with the group that most Villa supporters are blaming for our current predicament: the board.

The most common accusation from supporters (and recently sections of the media) is that Randy Lerner hasn’t invested the requisite amount of money to make Villa competitive. Unfortunately, this just isn’t true. Under O’Neill, Lerner’s net spend was just under £82 million on transfer fees alone. Since then, although we’ve sold Downing, Young and Milner for big fees (£20m, £17m & £18m) we’ve also signed Bent (£24m), Makoun (£6m), N’Zogbia (£7m), Given (£5m) & Benteke (£7m) whilst recouping virtually nothing. When added to the colossal wages we are paying to at least 4 of those listed (plus Warnock, Dunne, Hutton & Ireland – still on our books), the one thing Randy cannot be blamed for is not wanting to invest more money. Try and think of this entirely from a business perspective for a second; what has Lerner got to show for his investments? Even the most optimistic Villa fan would say we’re only as good as when he bought the club, so how has this happened, despite Spurs only spending roughly a net £10 million and Everton turning a marginal profit on transfer fees over the same period?

Sadly, despite all the investment the club has been grossly mis-managed at the top level. To illustrate this, we need to look at the managers we’ve had in that time, and how they’ve been allowed to run the club.

Lerner’s first, and arguably biggest mistake, at Villa was to allow the club to be run to the whims of Martin O’Neill. It’s one most of us would have made, and when we were challenging for the Top 4 and reaching Wembley, very few of us complained about it. But in the cold light of day, O’Neill wasted our best shot of the modern era. Look at these transfer fees; £3.5 million for Zat Knight; £3.5 million for Marlon Harewood; £8.5 million for Nigel Reo-Coker; £10 million for Curtis Davies; £4 million for Nicky Shorey; £5 million for Luke Young; £5.5 million for Steve Sidwell; £7.5 million for Carlos Cuellar; £6 million for Fabian Delph; £3 million for Habib Beye; £7 million for Stephen Warnock. All awarded highly paid long-term contracts on the advice of O’Neill, and all allowed to leave for virtually nothing. Meanwhile, Gary Cahill and Craig Gardner, two players we really could benefit from now, were allowed to leave cheaply. When Lerner eventually demanded O’Neill curbed his spending, he left us in the lurch days before the start of the season, taking his team with him and leaving the club with no contingency plan in place (he barely bothered playing kids and didn’t establish a scouting network as an alternative transfer policy).

But this isn’t a witch-hunt against O’Neill, nor am I blaming him for all our problems. The club was a mess when he arrived, and largely through sheer force of personality he transformed the club in his image, bringing with it a level of success unlikely to be surpassed at Villa Park for a very long time. Yes, he had certain managerial failings (tactically inflexible, inability to keep his squad fresh) that perhaps prevented us from doing even better, but I think most supporters will look back at performances on the pitch and the growth of the club under O’Neill very fondly.

O’Neill’s departure undoubtedly burned Lerner, and it’s easy to see now why Gerard Houllier appealed to him at the time. It was clear to most of us that a different approach was needed if Villa were to sustain our level of ‘success’ without continuing to spend huge amounts of money. Here was an experienced manager, with a broad knowledge of the global game who would establish the things the real top clubs have in place: worldwide scouting networks, a strong youth policy and tactical flexibility that had been ‘the missing pieces’ of the O’Neill era. Houllier’s problem was pragmatism (a word that’ll come up again and again throughout this piece), he tried to inflict too much change on a team not susceptible to his methods too quickly and his reign was charred with in fighting and dissent from players and supporters. Unfortunately, performances and results started to improve before his health scare caused him to leave the club in the summer. Again, Lerner had backed his man (to the tune of £30 million in less than 12 months) and again, he was left looking for a new manager.

With the benefit of hindsight now, the board at Aston Villa obviously took account of the tensions of Houllier’s tenure and tried to rectify them by appointing a manager who would be more in-tune with the senior players at the club. Although it’s also clear that any manager who took charge of Aston Villa at this time would have to improve the club without significant financial backing. It’s possible that from the candidates that fitted the boards profile, and that were crucially willing to work within the restrictions imposed upon them, that Alex McLeish was the only manager who would take the job, but it was doomed to fail from the start. We could talk about the Birmingham City connections all day, and despite our protestations otherwise, it clearly riled some supporters, and however, my main problem with Big Eck was that his appointment was clearly a short-term solution to what was rapidly becoming a long-term problem. Eight months on from his departure, I think we can see that McLeish actually was trying to be pragmatic about Villa’s situation, trying to get a competitive team on the field by cutting costs, but his dour football and backs-to-the-wall tactics were never going to be a long term fix to Aston Villa’s problems. I begrudgingly now applaud him for keeping us in the league under the circumstances but regard his reign as Randy’s big failure. We spent a year frantically treading water, and allowed a number of more forward thinking, progressive, smaller (no disrespect intended) clubs to catch up with us. And now we find ourselves under Paul Lambert in the situation we are now. We’ll discuss him separately later.

The common accusation against the board is that by cutting costs we’ve allowed quality players to leave the club to be replaced by inferior ones. This is only partially true. Yes, we have failed to replace the players that have left the club adequately, but this is as much down to poor signings by the managers and the constant changing of managers: one plan starts, it doesn’t yield immediate success and the manager is replaced, leaving the players he bought in to fall to the wayside. The board got carried away with O’Neill, were unlucky with Houllier and got it totally wrong with McLeish. So why have we allowed this to happen (and spent another small fortune doing so – we’ve spent more on hiring and firing managers since 2010 than any club in Europe bar Chelsea)? It’s here that another of Randy’s big failings becomes apparent. He knows virtually nothing about football, so why the absence of a football man on the board? As Villa’s fortunes have waned, Randy has become more and more entrenched with those he knows, when a genuine football advisor could have saved him from the McLeish debacle at least. The O’Neill and Houllier eras clearly burnt him, but by closing himself off he’s increased the risk that his time at Villa will eventually be doomed to failure.

One last point on the board is that most of us as supporters are rational, logical people. We want what’s best for Aston Villa more than anything, and we understand that throwing money at it is not going to help in the long term. But what is the plan? As a successful businessman Randy must have one, so why not communicate that with the supporters? If it’s to break even and then spend again the great, if it’s to run the club as a successful, profitable business then we understand (although relegation certainly won’t help so they are going about this the wrong way in my opinion), if it’s to recoup costs and then sell, then thanks for being honest and at least we will know why some of the more baffling decisions have been made. The silence from the club has been one of the more distasteful aspects of Lerner’s time at Villa, and many supporters feel now like they are being treated as idiots by their own club. That doesn’t make for a healthy environment for anyone at the club, particularly the young players struggling to get points on the board.

Which leads us to where we are now. I think most supporters were pleased with the appointment of Paul Lambert in the close season. Here was a young manager who’d had great success in the lower leagues and a fantastic first year in the Premier League with Norwich City, and who combined a steely, O’Neill like aura with a wider knowledge of the game from time spent playing and coaching in Germany. We accepted that the club had to change, and most were cautiously pleased with the signings made in the summer (I for one had long lamented the policy of buying proven Premier League players who commanded big wages when other teams seemed to find bargains on the continent and in the lower leagues) and despite a less than auspicious start it seemed finally like there was a long term plan in place to turn the club around. After a sizeable unbeaten run, capped by tremendous away wins at Carrow Road and Anfield, it seemed like it was a plan that was slowly coming to fruition too. And then Christmas happened, and I’m writing on the back of the worst run of results I’ve ever known at the club, whilst we sit in the bottom three contemplating the prospect of a spanking at The Hawthorns next weekend (one of those well run, progressive, ‘smaller’ clubs I’ve already mentioned). Confidence is gone, performances are awful and yesterday seemed like a new nadir because Lambert didn’t seem to know what to do, culminating in desperate substitutions that seemed to amount to putting on every available striker and hoping one of them does something. It’s not going to work I’m afraid, Paul.

So where do we go from here? Well, let’s not get too hasty. Sacking Lambert is not the answer. His long-term plan is sound, even if in the short term relegation looks more likely with every passing week. Plus, as we’ve ascertained already, the major reason the club is in such a dire situation is because of the constant chopping and changing of the manager and a distinct lack of long-term vision and continuity. We constantly compare ourselves to Everton, and the reason for their relative success is continuity. They have a good manager that they allow to manage the club within its restrictions. I still believe Lambert can do the same for us.

Lambert said yesterday that our current predicament is “nothing to do with having inexperienced players.” Crucially, he’s only partially right. The transfer policy is the correct one, and in Lowton, Westwood and Benteke he’s bought three potentially top players to the club at relatively cheap prices. If Villa fans think we’re going to go out and sign Lescott and Parker this January, then they are sadly misguided. Look at it like this: Why would their clubs sell them in January? If they would, why wouldn’t the rest of the Premier League want to sign them (we’re not Martin O’Neill’s Aston Villa anymore, we’re not even the Aston Villa Darren Bent joined. We don’t have that pulling power sadly)? And if they will be sold, and no one better off than us wants them, are we just repeating the mistakes of the past by paying players past their peak big wages and affording them the inevitable long contracts? Any players that fit all the criteria and our wage structure will be inferior footballers to the ones we have already. I’m sorry, but that’s just wasting money again.

But I said that Lambert’s assessment was only ‘partially correct’, because that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t utilise the experienced players we do have. I also said earlier that pragmatism would come up again, and I see this as Lambert’s big failing. His treatment of Warnock and Hutton has been impetuous at best. Even accepting their poor performances last season, not utilising two players that the club is still paying good money to when results and performances have been dire is wasteful. They are not the long-term future of Aston Villa, no, but no one can question their commitment, they will work hard to achieve results for the club and take some of the burden off the young players at the same time. Plus by not playing them but still paying them we are literally throwing money we’re constantly told we don’t have down the drain. More wastage at a club that’s had far too much. On a similar note, we aren’t scoring any goals yet have an international goalscorer at the club failing to get a game. Pick him, play to his strengths, and that’s one problem we won’t have to worry about anymore. It might even add a few million to his valuation should we choose to sell him in the summer.

Tactically too, Lambert’s ‘idealism’ is costing us dearly. When times are tough, and particularly with young, inexperienced players at the club, we must go back to basics. Our expansive, attacking style of football is not yielding goals, and is leaving an inexperienced defence lacking confidence woefully exposed (Joe Bennett had a stinker at Bradford, but how often was he left on his own against two men?) and a light-weight midfield with too much work to do. Play to the strengths of the good players we have, protect against the weaknesses of those we don’t. I’m not advocating a return to the dour negativity of McLeish, but (it’s that word again), be pragmatic. O’Neill was criticesed for being tactically inflexible, but the situation then was totally, utterly different. Were he in charge now, he’d sort out this mess in the short term very quickly. It was illustrated best by QPR’s game against Spurs yesterday. Despite being on the back-foot they cut off the space behind that Spurs thrive on and secured a valuable point. At 0-0 against the same opposition and despite us too being on the back-foot, we made attacking substitutions, opened the game up and played into the hands of a much better team. Pragmatism again I’m afraid. I would personally advocate a return to 4-4-2. It’s familiar to players, it protects the full-backs and it allows us to play our most dangerous players in their best positions. We’re currently trying to play like Chelsea with players desperately short of that standard, and it’s weakening us. I would advocate a team of Given; Lowton, Warnock, Dunne, Vlaar; N’Zogbia, Holman, El Ahmadi, Westwood; Benteke & Bent when everyone is fit. Look at the teams around us; all would gladly swap their team for that one. Until everyone is fit, play that way; make ourselves hard to beat and give ourselves the best chance possible. If we can get everyone back we may not need to spend any money to save ourselves. Stop being stubborn Paul. We believe in your long-term vision, but right now you’re doing as much harm as good.

Which leads me to one more thing, us, the supporters. Don’t boo players right now. They are trying, it doesn’t help. Don’t sing for Gabby when he’s not on the pitch, he last played consistently well three years ago, he’s not the saviour. We can’t do much, but we can turn up in our thousands and help make Villa Park a difficult place to go again. We’ve got a responsibility to the club now. We can still stay in the division, and we can still get to Wembley, and until we can’t let’s at least do our bit. I know we’re hurt and frustrated, but realistically, what else can we do?

And for their part, it’s time for someone from the club to come and talk to us. Tell us what Randy wants to achieve and how he wants to achieve it. Don’t treat us like fools. You need us and we need you. A mob supporters meeting is not the answer, but a few of us will gladly give up our time to listen to the club, convey the thoughts of the supporters and relay your plans back. It can’t make relations any worse can it? We can still do this together, and build that ‘bright future’ we were mis-sold a few years ago. But we need to take the right steps now.

Very Very Good Account.

[foreveryoung]

Excellent post, maybe Alex they should employ you as a coach or advisor, you seen very switched on to our problems.