The Randy Lerner thread

[Neil]

I think we underestimate the way in which money has changed in football, even in the time that Randy has been here. I think he came in looking to put a great club back on its feet, get it into the big time and once it was established sell it for a handsome profit.

I have no doubt that this was the driving factor that all went wrong. I can accept someone making mistakes....and it's really what you do to put right the mistakes you make, but in the end the club has paid dearly because this venture capital didn't come to fruition.

The mistake was probably thinking that it was possible with the budget that he had. I'm sure if he'd known how the success of the league would affect his ability to influence our fortunes he wouldn't have bought the club in the first place. The first in a series of errors of judgement I guess. The thing is at the time, I think most of us thought it was possible, and in truth, we nearly pulled it off.

For sure we were all loving it, and believing. But it is not for us to know what is his budget limit, but he should have...and set his stool out accordingly.

Nearly coming off hasn't helped at all, I can't dismiss that anyone with anything about them would have considered the possibility of it not coming off. He obviously didn't, saw his money going down the swanny, paniced and crippled the club as a result.

We had a good few years for which I'm thankful for, especially my opportunity to follow us to Europe and the Wembley final. But these are eclipsed by some of our worst years in history, breaking records in the wrong way.

The football had really been sucked out of us, match days were purely about seeing friends. I was convinced that with our owner situation, Lambert was our best option...I mean how **** up is that? I really didn't care for renewing, other than the friends I go with...and that was the life sucked out by randy. The sooner he is gone, the better.

[Neil]

are you honestly telling me with all the hype that came in with the signing of Martin O'Neill the new owner was going to start arguing with him about who he is going to sign and for how much.

That's the wrong way to set up the issue, TRO. It's not really about who is signed and for how much, if you mean by that transfer fees. In any case, MON did OK overall with returns on players he bought and/or improved in terms of their marketability. Think how much the club made out of the sales of Barry, Young, Milner and Downing alone.

The problem with our club since Lerner came has been the wages bill, which has been at an unsutainably high rate. Any owner with even a tiny bit of judgment should be able to work out if he is spending more than he can afford and Lerner seems to have failed to do this well beyond the MON era - think of Bent, Hutton, Given, N'Zogbia, etc.

If you are arguing it is unreasonable that the owner of a club should lay down a firm financial framework within which the manager works, I just think you are completely wrong.

All this, excellent post!

These are basics that we're taught in sschool. He had the books, it is not difficult to make a projection of turnover based on champions league or not. Then it's not difficult to multiply salary by contractual lengths and add the numbers together, and have an idea of what it is going to cost vs what you can make.

He could have had a rough idea, and made some provisions either way. In the end, I feel it was a venture to make money and when it was obvious that wasn't happening completely reversed the investment and pulled out as much as he could.

But this is a guy who makes his money on the back of his parents hand downs, silver spooned all his life. It doesn't surprise me, probably less business experience than a 5* McDonalds checkout worker...

[kurtsimonw]

 

are you honestly telling me with all the hype that came in with the signing of Martin O'Neill the new owner was going to start arguing with him about who he is going to sign and for how much.

 

That's the wrong way to set up the issue, TRO. It's not really about who is signed and for how much, if you mean by that transfer fees. In any case, MON did OK overall with returns on players he bought and/or improved in terms of their marketability. Think how much the club made out of the sales of Barry, Young, Milner and Downing alone. 

 

Depends how you define "okay".Of all the players signed by MON, did we even break even with their sales? Dunne, Warnock, Reo-Coker, Davies, Cuellar, Young, Sidwell and Shorey is over £50m net loss.

[Stevo985]

Transfer fees are only half the problem too.

 

It's the players like Habib Beye who contributed nothing and took home a massive pay cheque that were the problem.

 

A lot of MON's players (and McLeish to be fair) didn't have much in the way of resale value, and little motivation to move away from the club if they found themselves out of the team.

 

Lambert, for all his faults, mostly bought players who we'd make money from and/or would be eager to leave the club if they found themselves regularly out of the squad.

[BG_Villa_Fan]

At least MON's and ( very likely ) Lambert's buys would have some resale value. Benteke alone would pay for most of Lambert's mistakes. Young, Downing, Milner, Barry - for MON's. 

 

But Houllier's and McLeish's - zero value. Literally. 

 

To me the biggest mistakes, financial and footballing, were made post MON, not during MON's time. Also, if Randy Lerner's plan to get into top 4 was based on not being able to sustain the 6th biggest wage bill, then you can't blame any of the managers for this. It's on Lerner and his CEOs. 

Edited April 16, 2015 by BG_Villa_Fan

[TRO]

10m on Curtis Davies, holy cow

There was another big bunch of them.....the Barry,Milner, young money just helped to balance the books

[TRO]

TRO that sounds ridiculous. An owner NOT being Skye to advise the manager on finances and how much he can spend? Of Lerner really was that naieve then good c riddance. An owner should be and to tell his manager where the limits are at any point and not have to write blank cheques just because there was hype. How silly to suggest otherwise

That is simply, not what I said. Or meant.

The finances was brought to order at a time when the manager decided to leave.

That almost proves the point ,he MON was having none of that and had the finances being controlled earlier, which I presume some fans are alluding to and perhaps in hindsight should have been MON would have left earlier.

[TRO]

I had no intention of defending randy Lerner carte Blanche.and Genuinely have no interest in resurrecting the blame game, when I am more interested in tim sherwood.

I only set out to put some balance back in to the blame.

I hear all the arguments and I don't particularly disagree with any in the sense that they all have reasonable slants to them.

Of course we all know Randy was out of his depth.....even he knows that....but even he realised football is NOT a normal business, despite attempts to say it is.

I still maintain that during the reign where we spent most money,if the majority of players brought in had of represented extremely good value and contributed more to the success on the field......The subsequent worse managers would not have been signed and the state of the club would have quite different....and that what I believe...for my sins.

[TRO]

Have to agree with Jonah on this. Randy's poor financial management and being overly trusting are what put us in this mess. He didn't need to give MON a blank cheque and he should have had a contingency plan if we didn't make the Champions League. He gambled with both our Premier League status and the overall existence of the club and for that alone he won't be missed by me.

 

Hindsight is an exact science.

 

are you honestly telling me with all the hype that came in with the signing of Martin O'Neill the new owner was going to start arguing with him about who he is going to sign and for how much.

 

That is exactly what HDE would have done and he got castigated for it.....so don't give me that.

 

There maybe another argument to say that it took too long....I will grant that point.

 

See, I think its absolutely what he should have been doing or at least employ someone to do that on his behalf. Its absolutely hindsight and like others I was definitely not complaining about it at the time, it was fantastic. However if I had been told that following MONs reign that cost cutting would put us in a position where we have been fighting relegation ever since then I would be pointing the finger firmly at Randy for not taking that into account when he let him go on a spending spree.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not absolving MON, I just find it difficult to blame the employee to the same standard when the employer told him it was OK to do it.

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

[TRO]

Look they were both to blame......but neither party set out to be malicious.

So neither party needs to be hated.....they just made mistakes in an attempt to make us better.

Shit happens sometimes.

However, now it has happened, I just want to get back to normality and fingers crossed the new manager Tim sherwood will be financially supported by a new owner and we can improve the quality on the pitch.

Fingers double crossed.

[sexbelowsound]

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

I appreciate that but I would have thought a good business man would be far more skeptical. Its not like MON was a Mourinho or an Ancelotti etc with a track record of doing the thing we were buying the players to do which was get into the Champions League. He should have, and again its hindsight, gone out and got someone to oversee those deals, someone to tell MON that the vast majority of his signings were both overpriced and overpaid, and to steer him in the right direction at times.

Edited April 16, 2015 by sexbelowsound

[Zatman]

 

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

I appreciate that but I would have thought a good business man would be far more skeptical. Its not like MON was a Mourinho or an Ancelotti etc with a track record of doing the thing we were buying the players to do which was get into the Champions League. He should have, and again its hindsight, gone out and got someone to oversee those deals, someone to tell MON that the vast majority of his signings were both overpriced and overpaid, and to steer him in the right direction at times.

 

 

at the time when he joined  MON was probably the hottest manager in British football, he was some would say unfairly looked over for England job and always among favourites to take over from Ferguson

 

so I could see why Lerner would trust him

Edited April 16, 2015 by Zatman

[bobzy]

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

 

It doesn't matter.  MON could've turned round and said "I think Ronaldinho is worth £134m and £300k/wk wages" - it doesn't mean the board goes "Oh ok Martin, we'll bankrupt the club to fund this".  It's a non-starter as an argument.

 

If you're correct in saying all that Lerner had to go on was a manager picking and choosing how much to spend on players, and he went along with this entirely, then Lerner bears the brunt of the blame.  It's a **** stupid way to run a football club.

 

 

Edit:  Or indeed any business!

Edited April 16, 2015 by bobzy

[TRO]

 

 

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

I appreciate that but I would have thought a good business man would be far more skeptical. Its not like MON was a Mourinho or an Ancelotti etc with a track record of doing the thing we were buying the players to do which was get into the Champions League. He should have, and again its hindsight, gone out and got someone to oversee those deals, someone to tell MON that the vast majority of his signings were both overpriced and overpaid, and to steer him in the right direction at times.

 

 

at the time when he joined  MON was probably the hottest manager in British football, he was some would say unfairly looked over for England job and always among favourites to take over from Ferguson

 

so I could see why Lerner would trust him

 

 .....that is exactly my point....hindsight is convenient

i trusted him too at the start.

[TRO]

 

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

 

It doesn't matter.  MON could've turned round and said "I think Ronaldinho is worth £134m and £300k/wk wages" - it doesn't mean the board goes "Oh ok Martin, we'll bankrupt the club to fund this".  It's a non-starter as an argument.

 

If you're correct in saying all that Lerner had to go on was a manager picking and choosing how much to spend on players, and he went along with this entirely, then Lerner bears the brunt of the blame.  It's a **** stupid way to run a football club.

 

 

Edit:  Or indeed any business!

 

 

how can you possibly be wrong, but it isn't ANY business.

but we wasn't the first club to trust the manager and won't be the last.

 

your point about a player like Ronaldho is wide of the mark in my view an adds little to whats being said.

[TRO]

I think we underestimate the way in which money has changed in football, even in the time that Randy has been here. I think he came in looking to put a great club back on its feet, get it into the big time and once it was established sell it for a handsome profit. A scenario in which we all win. To that end he was prepared to put in £20m a year for as long as it took. 

 

£20m a year.

 

It sounds ridiculous now, but it's what almost got us there under O'Neill - in the nine years since he arrived, I reckon that figure has gone up tenfold, and that's money Randy Lerner hasn't got - by the time O'Neill left it was clear that £20m a season wasn't going to help, and it was nowhere near what you'd need now. Spurs brought on two subs that cost £60m against us at the weekend and they're a mile from 4th.

 

if you take that timeline and those increases and then put in our absolutely perfectly bad timing in every bad decision we made then you have a disaster, regardless of the intentions of those involved.

 

O'Neill thought we were close and needed more, I think Lerner saw it getting away and realised how much more it would need and the two of them clashed. O'Neill like a dog chasing a car that was picking up speed, Lerner running after him with the lead and eventually realising he had to drag him back.

 

Then we made a series of bad decisions whilst we tried to stand still and football ran past us - each one perfectly timed to happen right at the worst time in terms of how the footballing world was going - bad appointments, money wasted firing managers, buying badly, paying players we no longer had, a squad with little sell on value or developmental capacity, the quick fix older players that O'Neill liked all coming to the end of their serviceable footballing lives at the same time and us selling his best buys, those that did have potential in order to keep those that didn't, the domino effect on squad departures and the realisation that replacements had become too expensive - it's a series of calamities against a backdrop of an increasingly expensive league.

 

Randy made some errors and then got swamped. It's easy to look for a single villain, but we've not just been a victim of bad decisions at all sorts of levels, including Lerner's, we've been a victim of our footballing environment, of timing and of circumstance. 

 

I think that was an excellent post OBE and one I would have been happy to write....as I totally agree with it.

[Rob182]

Luke young was shocking business, wouldn't pay Charlton £4million for him so he went to boro, 12 months later we buy him for £6.

Lerner has been the perfect fool for Aston Villa managers, each one coming in with promise of doing this and that and leaving with a big payoff cheque when they've failed.

I really cant wait to see the back of randy tbh.

That sounds like a fantastic piece of business to me!

Wait 12 months and pay £3,999,994 less than first offered?! No brainer.

[maqroll]

I think we can all agree that Martin O'Neill is complete **** idiot.

[Davkaus]

 

We are on the same page then, because equally I'm not absolving Lerner.

On your last line....managers traditionally have known more about transfers I.e fees, wages, quality of player than owners, some exceptions like dein, whelan., even HDE.....but randy had to rely on his manager and that is exactly what his manager wanted.

 

I appreciate that but I would have thought a good business man would be far more skeptical. 

 

 

Unfortunately we don't have a good business man as the club's owner, we have a good business man's son.

[Neil]

Unfortunately we don't have a good business man as the club's owner, we have a good business man's son.

I think this gets overlooked, and explains a lot of the naivety. This is a guy who has bypassed all the "what makes and breaks you" of a hard working business life.

"When rich kids get bored with their toys"