Tomaszk Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 8 hours ago, briny_ear said: Hmm. If the performance of the club and the quality of the players it has are nothing to do with the owners, I wonder what you think they are responsible for? Drinkwater headbutting someone in training? NASSEF AND WES OUT 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briny_ear Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 1 hour ago, Tomaszk said: Drinkwater headbutting someone in training? NASSEF AND WES OUT OK, particularly at the moment I haven’t got the motivation to try to unpick what makes you so angry about the suggestion that our owners have some responsibility for the performance and quality of the squad/team. I certainly think Ellis, Lerner, Xia and now our current owners have their part in our disastrous decline over the last 10-15 years and (hopefully) recovery. But responding to comments like the one above doesn’t seem likely to lead to anything very fruitful. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TreeVillan Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 Owners come in spend a small fortune on players... Everybody is happy. Those players turn out to not be good enough... Suddenly the owners are charlatans. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 18, 2020 Moderator Share Posted March 18, 2020 3 hours ago, briny_ear said: the suggestion that our owners have some responsibility for the performance and quality of the squad/team. I certainly think Ellis, Lerner, Xia and now our current owners have their part in our disastrous decline over the last 10-15 years and (hopefully) recovery. The point, in my view, about ownership is that it can't be judged over a short time. Only a longer term, because changes take time to filter through. SO for example if the Goverment of the UK were to change, I couldn't immediately hold Kier Starmer, or whoever, responsible for the state of the NHS. But if after a couple of years, there were no improvements, then I could start asking questions. But you'd still need to factor in the starting point. Back to our owners, they took over a nigh-on bankrupt, EFL club, with an unbalanced squad and many players contracts coming to an end. In 20 months or so the team has done what? The squad is better or worse than when they took over? They've done good. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 9 hours ago, kurtsimonw said: It's a silly argument IMO. It's like saying owners are responsible for the success at all clubs too, they aren't. Owners are not usually footballing people. If they bring in people with a good track record (Purslow and Suso, in our situation) that's all they can do. If it doesn't work, how is that the owners fault? The owners job IMO, is to do exactly as above. Bring in those with a good track record of success, and to put the money in. Our owners have done exactly that, there's nothing more that they can do. If they were more hands on, people would complain that they are meddling owners. Its not a silly argument at all. our owners have been magnificent in terms of underwriting the club, but we are not talking about that.....its their money and if there is one sure way for them to lose interest, its keep bailing us out....its simpy not sustainable and no fun for them. We have to show them that their investment is prudent and secure their enthusiasm. The single most expense a football has ,is players, transfer fee's and wages.....run properly, those players improve and their value rises, consequently the team inproves and the rewards accordingly. All businesses are run from the top down, owners in football, appoint CEO's to run it who subsequently appoint managers and DOF's.....so their nous in appointing the right people is significant. Only they can answer, how long they are prepared to personally fund the club as opposed to being self sufficient......If we keep making near misses in the transfer market, decisions, will be made, that's is for sure. i have always maintained, with the correct support, managers are the most central figures to the success of football clubs.....but to suggest Owners play no part is wrong. They are the leaders and authority cascades down......their appointments are crucial to the right decisions being made on the football side of the club. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, TreeVillan said: Owners come in spend a small fortune on players... Everybody is happy. Those players turn out to not be good enough... Suddenly the owners are charlatans. That is not the point being put forward. We are crossing wires and contexts.. Spending money always makes fans happy, initially, because they presume that the people buying the players, know what they are doing. No one is suggesting they are charlatans at all, far from it...just suggesting their appointments are not showing signs of spending their sanctioned money, very well. personally, I am highly grateful for their financial input, but i know, its not sustainble in its current form. The main point is how the money has been spent and that is not the owners direct fault......but they are responsible for their appointments, who have spent it. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, blandy said: The point, in my view, about ownership is that it can't be judged over a short time. Only a longer term, because changes take time to filter through. SO for example if the Goverment of the UK were to change, I couldn't immediately hold Kier Starmer, or whoever, responsible for the state of the NHS. But if after a couple of years, there were no improvements, then I could start asking questions. But you'd still need to factor in the starting point. Back to our owners, they took over a nigh-on bankrupt, EFL club, with an unbalanced squad and many players contracts coming to an end. In 20 months or so the team has done what? The squad is better or worse than when they took over? They've done good. Pete, your point can't be ignored....but the danger is their santioned investment, of £140 million looks shaky at best....with just about every player showing no signs of improvement to date.....they preside over that, no matter how its dressed up....if it was HDE folk would be saying the same, he appointed them. Its not a direct attack on our owners, their support has been invaluable, but they do run the club and everything that happens, they have an option to be involved....its their responsibility, and their money....if we suddenly, turn this around, they equally should be credited, because its their appointments that have secured it. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 6 hours ago, Tomaszk said: Drinkwater headbutting someone in training? NASSEF AND WES OUT Now that really is a clear indication of missing the point. well done....have a cornflake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 4 hours ago, briny_ear said: OK, particularly at the moment I haven’t got the motivation to try to unpick what makes you so angry about the suggestion that our owners have some responsibility for the performance and quality of the squad/team. I certainly think Ellis, Lerner, Xia and now our current owners have their part in our disastrous decline over the last 10-15 years and (hopefully) recovery. But responding to comments like the one above doesn’t seem likely to lead to anything very fruitful. Ditto. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 4 hours ago, blandy said: The point, in my view, about ownership is that it can't be judged over a short time. Only a longer term, because changes take time to filter through. SO for example if the Goverment of the UK were to change, I couldn't immediately hold Kier Starmer, or whoever, responsible for the state of the NHS. But if after a couple of years, there were no improvements, then I could start asking questions. But you'd still need to factor in the starting point. Back to our owners, they took over a nigh-on bankrupt, EFL club, with an unbalanced squad and many players contracts coming to an end. In 20 months or so the team has done what? The squad is better or worse than when they took over? They've done good. Equally, if i owned a restaurant and my manager and chef have spent huge funds in chasing success.....that success was looking highly unlikely and their decisions looking very questionable. My investors call a meeting and ask for answers, if you think i can just simply dismiss it as their fault, and expect them to accept that......i would be a very lucky man. They would remind me, they were my appointments, so I am indirectly responsible. However our owners have no investors, its their money, but its folly to think they will continue to pump money in unconditionally, no matter how much passion for the club, they have shown thus far. We have seen first hand how Randy lost interest, i do not want that to happen again. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, TRO said: Pete, your point can't be ignored....but the danger is their santioned investment, of £140 million looks shaky at best....with just about every player showing no signs of improvement to date.....they preside over that, no matter how its dressed up....if it was HDE folk would be saying the same, he appointed them. Its not a direct attack on our owners, their support has been invaluable, but they do run the club and everything that happens, they have an option to be involved....its their responsibility, and their money....if we suddenly, turn this around, they equally should be credited, because its their appointments that have secured it. Doug Ellis would have never spent such an amount. Ellis was never moaned at specific player signings except the ones he wouldn't pay up for like Juninho or Robbie Keane. Was it Randy Lerner fault that ReoCoker and Nzogbia were duds, jobody blamed Xia for the failure of McCormack and Hogan. Needless go at the owners for no reason Edited March 18, 2020 by Zatman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 4 hours ago, TreeVillan said: Owners come in spend a small fortune on players... Everybody is happy. Those players turn out to not be good enough... Suddenly the owners are charlatans. whilst at the same time what constitutes a small fortune in footballing terms changes NSWE have spent what we would all deem an incredible amount yet the disparity between our squad value and those at the top is probably as big as its ever been so to judge their success on money spent is a waste of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 17 minutes ago, TRO said: Now that really is a clear indication of missing the point. well done....have a cornflake. And what's your point again? On 17/03/2020 at 15:58, TRO said: so far these money men have come up short on miserly uncle Herbert in terms of value for money. Ah yes, they've got less value for money than a man who was last Villa chairman 14 years ago as though that's comparable. A steady PL player probably cost £5m then not £30m. Bringing up Doug Ellis as a positive example negates any point you have and gives an indication you have no grasp on modern football. Absolutely none. The owners came in, spent a fortune so we didn't die, then appointed an experienced head to run the club. Then they spent monstrously again in the summer because we didn't have a squad due to prior mismanagement. I'm sure you'd have been front of the queue complaining if they hadn't spent. I'm sure they'll be looking at things in the summer whether we go down or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted March 18, 2020 Moderator Share Posted March 18, 2020 37 minutes ago, TRO said: the danger is their sanctioned investment, of £140 million looks shaky at best....with just about every player showing no signs of improvement to date. I sort of agree, to an extent on the first part of this. Villa gambled, and basically had to gamble, really in spending all that new PL income on players, as we had hardly any. Sheff Utd. and Norwich didn't need to do so, and didn't. One of those two, and maybe both will likely be better placed than us as a consequence. On the player values, I would think overall they're (with the exception of Wesley) all worth more than we paid, now. This is very different to previous times, where we've lost a fortune on buying high, selling low. The age profile of the recruits has been much better., but with that has come more risk of not immediately hitting the ground running and more chance of needing a year to settle. I don't see the owners as having made any mis-steps to date. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 6 minutes ago, Zatman said: Doug Ellis would have never spent such an amount. Ellis was never moaned at specific player signings except the ones he wouldn't pay up for Was it Randy Lerner fault that ReoCoker and Nzogbia were duds, jobody blamed Xia for the failure of McCormack and Hogan. Needless go at the owners for no reason You too are barking up the wrong tree.....the owners are ultimately responsible, no matter how you try to short circuit that responsibility......no one is saying they are directly responsible for an individual players success or failure.....but they are responsible for the peope that are......and should we be unfortunate enough to not turn this demise around.....you will see first hand their responsibility in action. you are equally missing the point that empathy has been directed at the Owners who have presided over a £140 mill sanctioned investment, that has shown no improvement to date. I suggest you glean exactly what is being said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 37 minutes ago, blandy said: I sort of agree, to an extent on the first part of this. Villa gambled, and basically had to gamble, really in spending all that new PL income on players, as we had hardly any. Sheff Utd. and Norwich didn't need to do so, and didn't. One of those two, and maybe both will likely be better placed than us as a consequence. On the player values, I would think overall they're (with the exception of Wesley) all worth more than we paid, now. This is very different to previous times, where we've lost a fortune on buying high, selling low. The age profile of the recruits has been much better., but with that has come more risk of not immediately hitting the ground running and more chance of needing a year to settle. I don't see the owners as having made any mis-steps to date. Yeah, i get much of that. If we are unfortunate enough to go down, i am not so confident as you, Pete, that we would recover our outlays...should we want to. I think Norwich are proving they did need to improve, but probably never had the resource we did, to do so, how they would have spent it, if they did, is another huge question. Sheff Utd in my view, chose a method and style of play and player that prepared them for the championship and subsequently the Premiership, much better than Norwich and us....thats just my opinion. In terms of mis-steps is hard to criticise a couple of guys who have done their best to underwrite us, its more than commendable...but that hasn't been the point.....the point had been the questionable investment in the summer, in terms of what we bought. Its quite normal in football life to question one aspect, in this case the summer investment...without evaluating every aspect of their actions. I also think if we do go down, the nature of the summer investment and implications of it......will be a significant feature of any subsequent meeting. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Tomaszk said: And what's your point again? Ah yes, they've got less value for money than a man who was last Villa chairman 14 years ago as though that's comparable. A steady PL player probably cost £5m then not £30m. Bringing up Doug Ellis as a positive example negates any point you have and gives an indication you have no grasp on modern football. Absolutely none. The owners came in, spent a fortune so we didn't die, then appointed an experienced head to run the club. Then they spent monstrously again in the summer because we didn't have a squad due to prior mismanagement. I'm sure you'd have been front of the queue complaining if they hadn't spent. I'm sure they'll be looking at things in the summer whether we go down or not. But i am not concerned on the money spent, i was pleased....its the way it was spent. Don't be distracted by the Ellis factor, just because he was a popular dislike....i was merely pointing out, he had some nous on a good or bad manager, even player,sure he made mistakes.....but we didn't lose as much money on purchases as we have over the last 10 years or so. it doesn't matter what era you care to mention, it has nothing to do with modern football, thats just a red herring....you can either value a player as good or bad then or now....the price is just a market thing, nothing to do with a players ability. Edited March 18, 2020 by TRO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, TRO said: But i am not concerned on the money spent, i was pleased....its the way it was spent it. Don't be distracted by the Ellis factor, just because he was a popular dislike....i was merely pointing out, he had some nous on a good or bad manager, even player,sure he made mistakes.....but we didn't lose as much money on purchases as we have over the last 10 years or so. it doesn't matter what era you care to mention, it has nothing to do with modern football, thats just a red herring....you can either value a player as good or bad then or now....the price is just a market thing, nothing to do with a players ability. Doug Ellis 10 record transfers Angel Collymore Alpay Baros Stone Dublin Balaban Crouch Alan Thompson Mellberg 2 hits, Angel a maybe. Lot of duds and I dont think we made profit on any of them players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRO Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 4 minutes ago, Zatman said: Doug Ellis 10 record transfers Angel Collymore Alpay Baros Stone Dublin Balaban Crouch Alan Thompson Mellberg 2 hits, Angel a maybe. Lot of duds and I dont think we made profit on any of them players So, Mellberg, Dublin, Stone, Collymore, with Angel duds, you have a unique opinion on duds. He presided over some really good players too like Yorke, Gray and Platt. There is no owner who has presided over every signing that is good, that would be pretty unlikely wouldn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted March 18, 2020 Share Posted March 18, 2020 1 minute ago, TRO said: So, Mellberg, Dublin, Stone, Collymore, with Angel duds, you have a unique opinion on duds. Mellberg and Dublin the only 2 good signings out of 10 for mighty Doug Ellis, Angel was a fan favourite but wasnt worth the price for us. Collymore was shit as useless as Scott Hogan for us, Stone was average and never really a starter here 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts