TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2012 But I think you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who'd be happy with mid table as the norm. I think Randy would be delighted, honestly I really do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 27, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 27, 2012 I don't, but that's off topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I'd be delighted with that right about now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I get the impression some fans would have no problem with consistent mid table finishes in the future. Some have made it clear they have no problem with relegation. And like Trent said I think Lener would be over the moon with that level of stability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarpie Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 How I see him leaving Norwich for us is that he had taken them as far as he could - he had arguments with the board about available transfer and wage budgets so he couldn't had invested into the team more than previously but with Villa he can take us back to fight for top 6 places. People keep saying that Lerner has given up trying to get us to compete for CL but we possibly can't know if that's the case. We simply HAD to get wagebill much lower and get rid of the some high earners because the turnover/wage ratio was 109% in 2010/2011 season which is just insane. AVFC now first has to get back to the mid-table finish so we can get the income higher, and then get gradually better team so that we can start to climb up to higher places. In the hindsight it was partly fault of Lerner who let MON to sign all those players with high fees and wages, but if we wouldn't had now cutback our spending and wages, we easily could've ended up as another Leeds or Portsmouth, would you really want that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 I'd be delighted with that right about now. So would everyone else 'Shillzz' and thats my point. We've gone very quickly from 6TH place finishes and challenging for Champions League to flirting with relegation so to finish mid table after spending 20m would still be seen as an acheivement and i'm finding it hard to accept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2012 We've gone very quickly from 6TH place finishes and challenging for Champions League to flirting with relegation so to finish mid table after spending 20m would still be seen as an acheivement and i'm finding it hard to accept. For the manager, given what he inherited it would be I don't think that can be denied. It doesn't mean as fans we have to be satisfied with our lot but it wouldn't detract from the level of success Lambert would have had even if it is at a lower level than we would want. All things are relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CI Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 If Lambert can't get the team up for this one I think we could be in trouble I expect us to play very high tempo from the off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 27, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 27, 2012 For the manager, given what he inherited it would be I don't think that can be denied. It doesn't mean as fans we have to be satisfied with our lot but it wouldn't detract from the level of success Lambert would have had even if it is at a lower level than we would want. All things are relative. Exactly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 When we were finishing 6th every season did you think we'd 'made it' at that point? I always thought there was a certain fragility about our position based on overachieving players coupled overspending on transfers and wages. Even at our height we never actually went to Anfield, White Hart Lane or Stamford Bridge expecting a result. We never cemented our place as a top 6 club during this time. We overachieved for some time, we are currently underachieving, but hopefully at some stage in the future, we will return to our rightful place between 6th and 14th. Teams just don't last in the higher echelons of the league without prolonged and intense investment. The top 6 will always have a familiar look about it, teams like ourselves, Newcastle and Everton may come and go, but without the investment, it will only ever be temporary. Edit: @Morpheus 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 In the hindsight it was partly fault of Lerner who let MON to sign all those players with high fees and wages, but if we wouldn't had now cutback our spending and wages, we easily could've ended up as another Leeds or Portsmouth, would you really want that? It was O'Neill's choice of player though that let the club down. Heskey, Shorey, Sidwell, Beye were signings on wages that didn't match their ability. If he had invested those wages in better players then we very well could have achieved that magical Champions League place and then the wage bill would have been sustainable. As it is Lerner has been very smart in driving down the expectancy of the fans while cutting back on investment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbr600rr Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 i have no problem with villa being where they are,villa are clearing the wood with overpaid players,pl is building a young team,im sure "if " we can get through this season villa will again rise..i would say within two seasons villa will be above wba in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 When we were finishing 6th every season did you think we'd 'made it' at that point? I always thought there was a certain fragility about our position based on overachieving players coupled overspending on transfers and wages. Even at our height we never actually went to Anfield, White Hart Lane or Stamford Bridge expecting a result. We never cemented our place as a top 6 club during this time. We overachieved for some time, we are currently underachieving, but hopefully at some stage in the future, we will return to our rightful place between 6th and 14th. Teams just don't last in the higher echelons of the league without prolonged and intense investment. The top 6 will always have a familiar look about it, teams like ourselves, Newcastle and Everton may come and go, but without the investment, it will only ever be temporary. Edit: @Morpheus We finished 6th 3 years in a row getting a higher points total each time. There aren't many clubs who have managed that level of consistency up there. I think we cemented our place in the top 6 but we just didn't no how bad things were behind the scenes in terms of how much the wages had spiralled out of control. i have no problem with villa being where they are,villa are clearing the wood with overpaid players,pl is building a young team,im sure "if " we can get through this season villa will again rise..i would say within two seasons villa will be above wba in the league. As long as WBA are a top 8 club and we're above them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted November 27, 2012 Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2012 It was O'Neill's choice of player though that let the club down. Heskey, Shorey, Sidwell, Beye were signings on wages that didn't match their ability. If he had invested those wages in better players then we very well could have achieved that magical Champions League place and then the wage bill would have been sustainable. True but the wage bill still wouldn't have been sustainable unless we retained a CL spot year after year. While O'Neill is culpable for some awful signings, Lerner is also culpable for allowing it to happen and for a business plan that was essentially a boom or bust gamble that Peter Risdale would of been proud of. As it is Lerner has been very smart in driving down the expectancy of the fans while cutting back on investment. There are many things you could say about Lerner but accusing him of having been 'very smart' for me just isn't one of them. Anyway..... back to Lambert. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHV Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 If Lambert can't get the team up for this one I think we could be in trouble I expect us to play very high tempo from the off If Lambert loses this one I think he is in big trouble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shillzz Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 We finished 6th 3 years in a row getting a higher points total each time. There aren't many clubs who have managed that level of consistency up there. I think we cemented our place in the top 6 but we just didn't no how bad things were behind the scenes in terms of how much the wages had spiralled out of control. We did, but we only managed to do so by adding more and more overpaid players each time, it was never going to last. It's just not a business model that can suit a club like ours, not unless you have an owner that's happy to write off tens of millions of pounds every year. We would never be able to achieve the kinds of incomes necessary to support having full backs on 50k + a year. The top clubs have fans all around the world, sell out most weeks and have huge global franchises, even at our height, we wouldn't have sold as many tickets on a weekly basis as Spurs or Liverpool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Exactly. For the manager, given what he inherited it would be I don't think that can be denied. It doesn't mean as fans we have to be satisfied with our lot but it wouldn't detract from the level of success Lambert would have had even if it is at a lower level than we would want. All things are relative. You see i feel that really comes down to how he has utilized the squad available and the new players he has brought to the club. There is no doubt that several players had to be dispensed with. There is also no doubt that our midfield and defence needed attending to, yet it is the way in which he has gone about the rebuilding process which has had me scratching my head. As i have continually named those players that i would have brought to the club there is no point in repeating it but for me he could have found a far better balance within his purchases to keep us in the top half while still rebuilding the squad. As it is, he has gone for youth rather than a balance of both experienced quality and youth and i think that is the real reason why we are where we are. That might however change in January and i hope it does but as i see it we're fine up front unless we sell Bent. We do however need to buy someone who will get better service to our front players whether that be a wide man or someone better than Ireland who can play the killer pass. We're going to concede goals so we must allow for that and be able to create more chances for whoever our strikers are and if Lambert isn't going to play Dunne again then we need another experienced quality CB. LB is also weak and that needs attending to. I don't think Bennett is ready for a relegation battle and neither is Stevens so we need someone better in there. I'm just not sure that Lambert will deviate from his youth policy but maybe there is a little chink of light with his apparent bid for Dempsey. We sall see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted November 27, 2012 VT Supporter Share Posted November 27, 2012 The problem is, your approach differs little from the approach we took under MON. "proven" players, who cost more, are paid more, but who's extra contribution (if any) doesn't reflect the extra cost. As I've said many times, yeah you're approach might see us in a better position in the short term. But would it have us in a better position (both on the pitch and financially) in the long term? I highly doubt it, IF Lambert succeeds, which I think he will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 The problem is, your approach differs little from the approach we took under MON. "proven" players, who cost more, are paid more, but who's extra contribution (if any) doesn't reflect the extra cost. As I've said many times, yeah you're approach might see us in a better position in the short term. But would it have us in a better position (both on the pitch and financially) in the long term? I highly doubt it, IF Lambert succeeds, which I think he will. No as i stated before O'Neill made a lot of poor choices as far as players are concerned with ability not matching wages. You can't say that Heskey was a proven goalscorer for instance or Beye was an excellent FB or Sidwell ability matched his wages or indeed Shorey. I could throw back at you 'Big Ron's' team but what i'm more interested in is the perception of short termism. Are we continually going to be building for the future whereby mediocrity (mid table) with no silverware is going to be the excepted norm rather than having some success and being able to challenge for the top six again. I actually believe thats achievable with the right balance of youth and experience now, rather than for ever purchasing youth who even if they make the grade will ultimately be cherry picked and consequently we will forever be in a re-building process emulating Crewe continually being praised for our youth policy but finding little success on the field. I want more than that and we all should expect more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villan_007 Posted November 27, 2012 Share Posted November 27, 2012 Are we continually going to be building for the future whereby mediocrity (mid table) with no silverware is going to be the excepted norm rather than having some success and being able to challenge for the top six again. I actually believe thats achievable with the right balance of youth and experience now, rather than for ever purchasing youth who even if they make the grade will ultimately be cherry picked and consequently we will forever be in a re-building process emulating Crewe continually being praised for our youth policy but finding little success on the field. I want more than that and we all should expect more. Essentially every team that is at its peak and performing well has a 3 yr cycle. After that certain players will have been cherry picked, or of an age where it's time to move on. The aim for lambert is to get this crop of youngsters challenging, whilst at the same time bringing through the next lot who can step in and take their chance when it arrives. This way even when players leave for bigger clubs there is a player to step in. This way we benefit from the transfer fee but have a ready made player in place. However we would also be in the financial position to buy someone of the same calibre if need be. I totally understand where you are coming from in terms of needing experience, I just dont think it's lamberts way. And if you look at the clubs around us that have signed the prem tried and trusted players, they aren't exactly setting the league on fire. If lamberts plans comes off how I think he wants it to, I think the club is in very good hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts