foreveryoung Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 BRING BACK O'NEILL!!! This is joke, right?? Although he could probably get us 6th again with 100 million a season!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 If he can't sell outright, surely he can find someone to invest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 RL is going to ruin this club. Villa spent £7.5m this summer. A team that really looked doomed at times last season spent the least. And we're expecting different results? Spending 7.5 million pounds doesn't allow a team stand still in this league. It's Championship spending. People complaining about Paul Lambert, and I'm one of them, not because I think he's incompetent, but mostly because I think he's the happiest patsy I've ever seen. Lerner won the lotto last year because the team wasn't relegated and this year he might win it again if there are three worse teams than us in the league. Are we spending the TV money on paying him back for the MON years, or are we spending it on Darren Bent's wages? Everyone hates the puppet, but no one is shouting abuse at the puppeteer who is responsible for the things he's saying. It's strange. Yeah it looks like we can't do anything about it, and our lobotomised manager is happy to perpetuate this idea of helplessness and it's pathetic, but there's a man at the top who is mining this club and we're all faffing about letting him, and directing the anger towards Lambert, who is picking up a sizeable paycheck every week, and his reputation is intact. No wonder he seems so placid in interviews. Lambert's hands are tied in the transfer market, but fortunately he doesn't need them because he's getting sucked off under the table by his big contract. Aston Villa are on their knees nearly apologising to the big teams for showing up to play them because it was so inevitable that they'd win. Aston Villa. Have you seen our stadium? Have you seen our big trophy case? We used to be a club that was expected to be in the top 6. The goalposts have moved, but we're still playing on the same grassy pitch as Everton and West Ham. Why then compared to them have we been this sort of sickly Tiny Tim character, while Everton and West Ham, and bloody Southampton are daring to knock on the doors of the top 4 and say it's **** Christmas day and Bob Cratchit is not coming in. Paul the meek is only a symptom of the problem. Lerner is the disease. He is an inept owner who wants his money back. Lambert is also motivated by greed. Any other manager would have walked at this stage. This is why Pulis will never get the Aston Villa job, nor will Moyes. It's why Martinez turned us down. It's why McLeish was given a season. We were looking for someone without any balls. We have the manager we deserve for not publicly embarrassing Lerner for his ineptitude. Every year he's here, he's clawing back the money owed to him by the club for the MON years. That's where the TV money goes I reckon. And if eventually we go down, he'll still be able to cash in on a club with a big stadium, big fanbase and a big history, and not lose out on too much in terms of club price, considering that the club at the moment is like a car teetering over the edge of a cliff - Even though it still runs and theoretically can get you from A to B, once you get in it's very likely going to drop. TL;DR Lerner is a word removed and should be told as such. Lambert would only get replaced with someone probably less capable and more amenable to Lerner's grand plan of mining the club dry. You can be such a good writer at times that it doesn't matter that I disagree with a fair bit of your post, it's still a charm to read. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 To spend more than we have been doing over the past few seasons we need to generate more there are rules to be adhered to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 To spend more than we have been doing over the past few seasons we need to generate more there are rules to be adhered to. The FFP that you refer to will only restrict our participation in Europe....which isn't likely....for some time. In terms of the Premier League rules, at worst, we'd get a fine.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 If you don't adhere to UEFA rules and spend the limits of PL rules what is the point? You end up spending 3 times as much and getting no return of getting into Europe. If you do get into Europe you then get a 50 million fine spread over 3 years as that is the precedent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 If you don't adhere to UEFA rules and spend the limits of PL rules what is the point? You end up spending 3 times as much and getting no return of getting into Europe. If you do get into Europe you then get a 50 million fine spread over 3 years as that is the precedent. The precedent that was reduced on appeal? We could spend another £15-20m and not be hit by anything. If we spent £50-70m that'd be a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 No the 50m was spread over 3 years that was all that changed. Also spending another 15 to 20m is 35 to 40m per season and that doesn't include the wages. Have you even seen the finances? Do you also realise whatever we do today is hamstrung by the losses of the last three years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 No the 50m was spread over 3 years that was all that changed. Also spending another 15 to 20m is 35 to 40m per season and that doesn't include the wages. Have you even seen the finances? Do you also realise whatever we do today is hamstrung by the losses of the last three years? Yes, I am very aware of how FFP works. I also think its a brilliant excuse for us not spending. We have made losses, but this only effects us over three years if competing in Europe. We are not losing the money that we were, and we are 2-3 years away from Europe even if we spend £15-20m a season. Therefore, we wouldn't be over the limits for FFP, and wouldn't be fined/banned from competition, as our record losses from a couple of years ago would not be taken into account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Yillan, I sort of agree with the thrust of that post but not much of the detail of it! Haha, yeah spot on. In an analogy way it's, sad to say, very true. Lerner being the disease and lambert being the sympton. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Ok I am glad you are aware of FFP rules but you clearly have no understanding of the clubs accounts or the motivation to lose money. Its ok to lose a hundred million if it gets you into Europe and your club is worth more and those losses become sustainable if you stay in Europe by virtue of much higher revenue. If you don't get there you lose a shed load of money and if you do get there you get fined shed loads of money the first year, the second year and the third year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Ok I am glad you are aware of FFP rules but you clearly have no understanding of the clubs accounts or the motivation to lose money. Its ok to lose a hundred million if it gets you into Europe and your club is worth more and those losses become sustainable if you stay in Europe by virtue of much higher revenue. If you don't get there you lose a shed load of money and if you do get there you get fined shed loads of money the first year, the second year and the third year. I am not suggesting losing one hundred millions pounds and there is where your point falls apart. I am suggesting a slight increase in our investments as we had successfully reduced wage bill and spending over the past few years (although the non-playing wage bill is still far too high). This means that we could add a player or two in the £6-8m bracket without causing ourselves too many issues, especially when increased commercial revenue and TV deals (especially the new overseas deal) is taken into account. This why the likes of Hull, WBA et al can all afford to make these kind of investments even without the kind of revenue that we generate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Actually the point doesn't fall apart as that is the extent of our three year losses at the moment so raising spending from 20 to 35 to 40m doesn't fit and we aren't even talking wages just fees here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dodgyknees Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 I might want Lambert gone, but this word removed can **** off too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik986 Posted November 8, 2014 Share Posted November 8, 2014 Actually the point doesn't fall apart as that is the extent of our three year losses at the moment so raising spending from 20 to 35 to 40m doesn't fit and we aren't even talking wages just fees here How would we be raising spending to 35-40m if we spend £20-30m? I know its over three years, but as a club we can now afford to spend £15-20m and be self-sufficient. Obviously, some of this could we be supplemented with sales of those fringe players, thus reducing the wage bill. If we bought two £6-8m players, which would improve our first XI and squad considerably, we would add in the region of 50k a week to our wage bill (if we buy sensibly). Again, due to the cuts made at the club, this is now sustainable. If we were to the cut Bent and Given from the squad (Bent on 60k+ a week and 6 months left on deal) we could spend this money and not increase wage bill. So, I repeat, again, we can spend and still not fall foul of FFP. If we qualify for europe in 2 seasons time, our losses would be hugely under the necessary in order to get a european registration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 We have been spending 15 to 20 million it was only this season we haven't due to players not moving to us it would be 14 with our loan player alone and you can bet that we spend in January for once because of it hence why increasing 15 or 20m a year is 35-40. We can only break even ATM because of losses if we ever want to have a go again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Anyone would think Doug Ellis must have a play in this whole process somewhere. This is exactly the same what we went through with that arse wipe too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suttonpaul Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Not really it was much easier to spend to the top in dougs day and he didn't have FFP either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AvfcRigo82 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 FFFP is aload of bollocks aswell. It might have been much easier my friend, but he also hardly spent **** all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 9, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 9, 2014 To be fair, given the amount of money it would take to get us from where we are to the Champions league - that £50m fine would be a drop in the ocean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts