dn1982

17 minutes ago, Woodytom said:

Yes Solihull moors are one thing, but, doncaster rovers for example, certainly have one.

I take it you're a secret one direction fan to know this?? 

1 hour ago, weedman said:

I really hate seeing this argument. Ok, yes, trying SHOULD be a minimum, but it isn't. Not amongst premier league footballers. Therefore someone who gives 100% every game is a positive trait no matter how much we would expect everyone to do it, because most (especially in our team) only care about checking their bank balance

Guzan tries but is still crap! Running around aimlessly isn't trying! Hutton looks like he tries but he doesn't do that much. There's a clip on Twitter showing him lose the ball them ambling back without breaking a sweat. We have been that starved of effort this season him running into a dead end and then not tracking back is a positive to some. He is supposed to be an attacking full back but when did he last set up a goal? Or even a clear cut chance? If he isn't doing this he needs to be a solid defender which he isn't. 

4 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

I love how you're making out that a player 'trying' is a bad thing. If we had a first team of Hutton's this season (as scary as that sounds), I would put good money on us finishing higher than 20th.

We have too many players happily taking their money and giving nothing back. Give me a 6/10 ability and 10/10 effort player any day. Aside from the odd gem, that's basically what the Leicester squad is made up of.

Trying should be a minimum. It's also a load of crap that he tries that much more than others it's just he'll run as fast as he can into a dead end then trot back to his defensive position!  If we had a team of Huttons we'd be a lot worse off. He has turned into an awful footballer that can't defend. We need a new RB. We stayed up last season with Bacuna at RB but some how Hutton managed not to be replaced in the summer so was first choice all year!! This actually goes for Guzan aswell. The only games we won were when Hutton wasn't playing! For me a RB and a GK are the main priorities to fill as our current ones are shocking. Hopefully they'll be the first 2 position sorted in the makeover we need badly. 

30 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Because Amavi (if it's true) insisted on having it or he wouldn't sign.

Exactly if true! My point is why bother having a relegation wage drop if you're just going to allow the player to leave anyway and lose more than you'd save? So effectively in Amavi case he will cost us £14m if he leaves now I know we are not the best run but that doesn't offer anything for us as you'd be lucky to get that back for a top left back anyway!!! 

19 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

We need new players in all areas, but just stating what we might end up with following player sales.

I don't really rate Baker, Clark and Gardener much but at championship level they might do ok.

Hutton seems to get support because he "tries"! I'd rather play more of the kids as Toner has showed they don't get over awed. It's going to be a busy summer though in and out!! 

Anybody who went to football in those days would've been involved in a surge that crushed them to a degree. It didn't matter what division you was in so find it very morbid drawing similarities. 

3 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

But the alternative was in all probability to not sign him.

I assume the club thought the risk was worth it.

If we used that across the board we will be another 20m in the hole!! 

6 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

 

Clauses don't come from the selling club all the time!

We don't just chuck buy out clauses in because we feel like it. If this clause is true then it would have come from Amavi's camp to ensure we couldn't force him to see out his contract if an offer came in for him.

It's the same as the Delph buy out clause last year. People moaned that we were stupid to put that in, but it would have come from Delph's side and was probably a deal breaker in getting him to sign an extension. It effectively made us £8m.

I don't doubt there is a clause and I'd say most of last years signings have them it's just the actual release fee. Most will be on  2-3m a year so why have a clause that loses you 4-5m? Delphs release clause has never been an issue it was the u turn! Anyway let's never speak of him again. 

37 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

Surely you're just thinking from the clubs point of view. A player isn't going to want to play on less money in a lower profile, lower league and isn't going to want to be priced out of a quick exit.

I'm not suggesting it was a good move by Villa if true, but it's a likely possible scenario.

My point is it'd be better for the club to keep him on full wages than to sell him for such a loss. Any decent agent would want a release clause but we'd be mad to do it unless it suited both parties. Taking a £5m loss when his wages wouldn't even be half that is stupid. 

15 minutes ago, AlwaysAVFC said:

If I was an agent and a club wanted to put a relegation wage drop in the contract of my player, I would be be negotiating for as low a release clause as possible and wouldn't be accepting the same as what was paid.

Relegation drops are pretty standard. Why pay £9m but have a £4m release clause? You may aswell scrap the wage drop. To be worth a £5m drop he'd have to be on £10m a year in the first place!! 

Just now, Richard said:

There is a difference between having physical assets,  ie the ground and training facilities and having an infrastructure to support a top flight football club.

I have no doubt our ground is good quality,  our training facilities are second to none,  our fans are amazing and a credit to any club.  The brand i do not agree is a good one.

However ,  the structure is most definitely not supportive of a top flight club

 

Unfortunately we aren't one anymore so we need a Championship structured club. Fox and Co was trying to address our lack of infrastructure but completely failed in getting a top flight team. Let's get it right on both accounts in the Championship then address the rest once we get back up. 

I doubt the figure would be that low after we had only just stayed up in the previous years. There maybe a clause but can't see it being for less than what we paid. If you put in wage drop clauses you would surely not have such a low release fee as you are covering for relegation in the first place. 

3 minutes ago, Richard said:

we do not have a premier league infrastructure.

Cheers yoda

2 hours ago, Genie said:

...but we're currently running at £30m annual loss, reduced revenue coming in plus Randy couldn't sell it for £150 over the past 2 years either...

The new TV deal means we won't lose much revenue this year. It'll only become an issue if we don't go up at first attempt then with the new TV deal being huge we should easily be able to turn a profit. We have been very badly run on and off the pitch for years. A club of our size should be having a much bigger turnover than what we have. None of that will matter if we don't get up next season though. 

Pearson gets a lot of credit for rebuilding Leicester OFF the pitch just as much as on it. That for me is something we need badly. Somehow we have let the senior players run the show and it's got into all involved in the 1st team squad. That is a massive reason to give him the chance to sort it out. He has lower league success. He has built teams with little finances. I don't care if he punches Gregg Evans in the face on a weekly basis after the press conferences just as long as he sorts the club out. I still don't think he's nailed on especially if we are bought out. If we are that could open the door to the likes of Moyes and Dyche but I'd still put Pearson in my top 3 for now. 

1 minute ago, villarocker said:

Those suggesting Pearson because of how he got Leicester to the Premier League; would you also take Nigel Adkins as he did a similar, if not better, job at Southampton? 

Adkins never got a full season in Prem did he? I think they got rid even though not in relegation zone. Pearson did more to stabilise the club IMO Saints had a very sound behind the scenes team something we haven't! 

3 minutes ago, S-Platt said:

Dwight Gale would destroy The Championship bit part player at Palace or a chance to be the man at Villa Park?

Is Steven Fletcher on loan? I think he'd go well with Gayle. I can't see us keeping Ayew unfortunately and think Gestede is awful so we need a couple of strikers to go along with the young ones coming through. 

18 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

even if we lose most of the so called 'bigger prem' players, i feel we would keep two or three just due to previous injuries or lack of playing time under Garde or Black.

So without any transfers we could have the below 11, as well as Bennett, Kozak and Gabby knocking around the squad and a few more decent youngsters. Okore may stay on also.

Steer

Hutton -- Toner -- Clark -- Amavi

Traore -- Lyden -- Vertout -- Grealish

Gestede -- Rush HM

Subs: Baker, Green, Gil, Bunn, Suliman, Westwood, Gardner

I don't know if the above would do that well in the Championship, but i'd rather watch the above team than the current eleven, Ayew aside.

I don't think we would need to spend huge amounts of money to become anstable team capable of competing again. There will also be a few players that leave who we didn't expect to leave like Traore or Grealish, as well as players we hoped would but didn't such as Bacuna and Lescott.

 

Hutton is awful! The amount of ball he gets yet never creates anything. If he was a brilliant defender you could live with it but he isn't. We need a new RB and a commanding keeper. We also need a right side CB if Okore goes. I think attacking wise we have a few coming through that will do well. 

2 minutes ago, Stevo985 said:

Again, you've clearly misread or misunderstood my posts.

I've explained this 100 times and people still ask the same questions.

 

Yes, fergie has a volatile personality. So does Mourinho, so did Brian Clough.

What's the difference between them and Pearson? They are exceptional football managers. They make up for their volatility by being excellent at their job. Nigel Pearson does not. If Pearson was head and shoulders better than other managers out there, I would be backing him and saying it doesn't matter about his personality. But he's not. 

 

I have never said Pearson isn't good enough for our club based purely on managerial ability. What I've said is that he's no better than other managers out there who do not come with that volatile personality that, imo, would be a huge risk with our club in it's current situation.

In short, my argument has been that there are much better choices out there.

Should I make this my signature for the next time someone asks me the same question?

That's fair enough but his managerial record is good enough for what we need but you always seem to call him a word removed which negates your view of his ability. I look forward to you singing his name when we get promoted!! 

Hopefully this page will be defunct in a few weeks but you shouldn't let the momentum gathered as a supporters group stop. As I've wrote in the Home Support thread it'd be good to continue going forward but as a positive group. If this was allied to the banners and stuff Villa Park would be a good place to be next season whether it's 20000 or 40000 in the ground. 

1 hour ago, Stevo985 said:

Exactly, like half a dozen others, all of whom come without the additional volatile personality and PR bizarreness. Much better options

Apart from a few incidents in his last few months at Leicester when else has he been this so called word removed? I'd class Fergie as having a volatile personality so I don't see that as a negative. Pearson gets credited with getting Leicester in the shape for Raneiri to win the title with them but you don't seem to think he's good enough to sort out our rabble? That is a very strange position but there's a few managers who could do a job here who I wouldn't want just out of a personal dislike for them. 

I echo what's already been said above. Theres an oppurtunity to move the protest group forward as an actual proper supporters group. Getting carnival atmospheres every game would be hard but a few times a season would be brilliant especially with the amount of derbies we have. Hopefully a sale in the coming weeks will kill off any need to protest and we can get a united club again as we will need it to get back up. 

4 minutes ago, Jareth said:

I quite like the 7% polish beer they have started stocking down my local offy - it's basically tenants super without the stigma.

Anyway, Birmingham Mail repeating the story again, I think they believe it to be true and are getting behind it in full now. Could it be announced this week? Why not.

The Mail are the same news group as the Mirror so it doesn't mean anything. Most papers just report what's in other papers these days there are very few exclusives since social media.