Tomaszk Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Imagine if he was at, say, Newcastle and had that record. And was then linked to us! Everyone would hit the the roof. We'd think it laughable he could ever be given the job here. He's got a long journey ahead of him back to the Premier League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedClaretAndBlue Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I think he will bide his time wait for that Delia bloke to leave and take the easy option rebuilding his reputation at Celtic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted March 18, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) Transfer fees are only half the story though. If Lerner stumped up the 200 million to buy Messi but we could only pay him 20 grand a week, we wouldn't be signing him. Yeah Lambert had a decent chunk of money to spend. But he has to drastically cut the wage spend during that time and it's difficult to build a squad like that. Edited March 18, 2015 by Stevo985 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 His stock is higher outside of Aston Villa than people realise. Rightly or wrongly people think he did a good job under difficult conditions. Source? a lot of people on Sky like Jeff Stelling kept defending him and blaming the conditions he was dealt and was never Lambert fault though this fool also suggested Pulis for United and we should have been happy under mcLeish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I don't ever remember Lambert having £50M to spend in two and half years, maybe he did but it's not a great deal when the entire squad needs working on and teams around us like Hull are spending big money on the likes of Livermore and Long. I think in all probability Mcleish was sacked because the club knew that they'd lose out financially from loss of season ticket revenue if he stayed on, if the fans weren't so against him he'd have kept his job. We added experience this season in the form of Cole and Sendeross who've both been injured so haven't really felt their benefit on the field of play. Interesting you mention Shane Long. Signed for £7m and then sold for £12m not long after (excuse the pun!) therefore theoretically funding the majority of the Livermore purchase. Lambert was taking us one way - he was totally out of his depth. As far as I know Hull signed Livermore months before they sold Long to Southampton. Sunderland are another example of a team competing in and around the relegation places who've been spending huge bucks on individual players, whilst during the same period we've had to spread our money amongst several players. money isnt the problem, Lambert has proved himself you can buy decent players with small transfer budget. problem is he didnt get anything out of these players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I don't ever remember Lambert having £50M to spend in two and half years, maybe he did but it's not a great deal when the entire squad needs working on and teams around us like Hull are spending big money on the likes of Livermore and Long. I think in all probability Mcleish was sacked because the club knew that they'd lose out financially from loss of season ticket revenue if he stayed on, if the fans weren't so against him he'd have kept his job. We added experience this season in the form of Cole and Sendeross who've both been injured so haven't really felt their benefit on the field of play. Interesting you mention Shane Long. Signed for £7m and then sold for £12m not long after (excuse the pun!) therefore theoretically funding the majority of the Livermore purchase. Lambert was taking us one way - he was totally out of his depth. As far as I know Hull signed Livermore months before they sold Long to Southampton. Sunderland are another example of a team competing in and around the relegation places who've been spending huge bucks on individual players, whilst during the same period we've had to spread our money amongst several players. money isnt the problem, Lambert has proved himself you can buy decent players with small transfer budget. problem is he didnt get anything out of these players Yep. The Long and Livermore examples are hilarious. What would people prefer - Long and Livermore or Benteke and Westwood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The point was that Hull have had a stack of money to spend as have QPR and Sunderland, whilst Lambert has not. That Benteke and Westwood might be seen as better footballers than Livermore and long is just another feather in Lambert's hat. And money is the problem you can buy one or two decent players on a budget but when you have to work on the whole squad you need big money for transfer fees and to be able to pay the players a competitive wage. Any set of players where the average cost of each member is about 2 or 3 million is going to struggle in this league because money talks. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 The stuff about him having to build an ENTIRE squad with his £42m is a compete fallacy too. Who said that he had to build the entire squad with his £42m? It was one of the many buzz-phrases to be parroted throughout last season by his supporters. I don't think it can be denied that the squad needed a massive overhaul. If Lambert have have spent that '£42M' on three or four players on top of what we already had at the time then we really would have been in trouble. Why 3/4? Why not 10 as opposed to 20? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 If you sign ten players, then I think that can be classed as a squad over haul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morley_crosses_to_Withe Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) The point was that Hull have had a stack of money to spend as have QPR and Sunderland, whilst Lambert has not And where did that stack of money get them? The PL competes in tiers, and in our tier of clubs, spending an extra £10M-£20M doesn't really matter all that much. It's just as important to get value for money as your own two examples have shown. I agree that Lambert has done well (generally) with transfers, but he was the victim of his own success. He built a squad that, IMO, should be comfortably mid-table, but instead were bloody woeful under his management. Edited March 18, 2015 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I think people overrate our squad when they say it should be comfortably mid-table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I think people overrate our squad when they say it should be comfortably mid-table. Really? Where do you think it should be? Not knocking your comment, just interested. I look at Stoke, Swansea, West Ham and Newcastle occupying 8-11 in the league. I think we should be there. That's mid table. I don't look at their squads in envy. i think we are every bit as strong as them, if not stronger in some areas. That's a credit to Lambert to be fair. I've always paid compliment to his transfer dealings. What I couldn't accept was the atrocious, insipid, mind numbingly, eye bleedingly awful excuse for 'football' that he had us playing. I'll never forget or excuse that 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I heard somewhere the other day that if you add the points up that Pardew has won this season at Newcastle and Palace he'd be in eighth place now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I heard somewhere the other day that if you add the points up that Pardew has won this season at Newcastle and Palace he'd be in eighth place now. What's that got to do with the price of fish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) Nothing, I wouldn't have thought. Edited March 18, 2015 by useless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 I heard somewhere the other day that if you add the points up that Pardew has won this season at Newcastle and Palace he'd be in eighth place now. Palace have the right idea. Change manager every year and get the new manager bounce to survival! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Pardew is a ridiculous human being. When his clubs start losing he seemingly has no way of stopping the rot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momo Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Pardew is a ridiculous human being. When his clubs start losing he seemingly has no way of stopping the rot. We will see how Sherwood handles it if the enthusiasm in the squad falls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 Pardew is a ridiculous human being. When his clubs start losing he seemingly has no way of stopping the rot. We will see how Sherwood handles it if the enthusiasm in the squad falls. What an odd post. I never mentioned Sherwood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted March 18, 2015 Share Posted March 18, 2015 (edited) The point was that Hull have had a stack of money to spend as have QPR and Sunderland, whilst Lambert has not. During the time Lambert was in charge the reality is as follows in terms of overall transfer activity: Hull £54m QPR £44m Sunderland £38m Villa £49m (could have been £5m higher if Rickie Lambert accepted the move) Never mind clubs like Burnley, Crystal Palace, Leicester, Newcastle, Stoke, Swansea and West Brom who all had an overall transfer activity considerably less than Villa's over the period Lambert was at Villa. Lambert DID have the money and his transfers in on the whole weren't too bad. I think his poor management of a number of our players arguably contributed to us not getting maximum fees for some of them. When he left we were in the relegation zone with just 22 points from 25 games and only 12 goals scored! He left us as a failure and was rightly sacked - although he should have been chopped a lot earlier! Edited March 18, 2015 by Brumstopdogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts