Big_John_10 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 Actually I wasn't the one who first mentioned top 6. I said becoming a team we were for the most part under Doug. I still don't think it's that much harder to do.You've an answer for everything. It doesn't matter who said it first. The point is someone said it and you questioned them despite there being a painfully obvious answer that really didn't even need clarifying (Man City). You then didn't accept that City made it more difficult by implying that it's still possible (which wasn't the original point being made). You've demonstrated through your posts that this isn't actually a discussion at all. Your point blank refusal to accept anything being said by others makes it completely pointless 'discussing' things and on that note I'll bow out. Good luck. As opposed to people accepting anything I say? I don't see you having a problem with people disagreeing with me but do have a problem with me disagreeing with others. What a very hypocritical and arrogant post. No one asked you to join in the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 You reference to Doug is solely based on league po Sorry I thought Aston Villa were a competitive professional sports team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 Disagreement in itself is not a problem if it's valid. Constant disagreement for the blind sake of disagreement in the face of cogent arguments completely lacks credibility. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) Disagreement in itself is not a problem if it's valid. Constant disagreement for the blind sake of disagreement in the face of cogent arguments completely lacks credibility. Again very arrogant. So my arguments are not classed as cogent arguments. Why because you say so? And I guess the arguments that you agree with are then? You make it sound like I should be agreeing with you because your arguments are so clearly right. Edited June 20, 2013 by Big_John_10 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 (edited) Unable to kick on under Lerner, what have you been smoking? We finished 6th three seasons running and were mooted as the ones to break the top 4 And how did that work out? We were able to challenge because we spent levels of money we couldn't afford to spend with seemingly now plan than to just keep spending. How is that evidence that we can kick on? we are now kicking on - unless you deny this also? No of course we are. Is not being in a relegation battle for the first time in 3 years worthy of praise? Not for me. The argument about kicking on was why people wanted Doug gone. I don't think he can kick the club on to a different level than what we saw previously. 3. This seasons league placing as far as I know has no bearing on the tv money distribution for next season, this is done evenly throughout the league unless I'm mistaken? (aside from individual fees for live matches which are done on a game-by-game basis and Man Ure being on every other week will ultimately mean that they get more than us or anyone else but the bulk of the TV money is distributed evenly prior to the start of the season) That's wrong. Naturally league placing is important but given the transitional phase we're in (unless you'd like to deny this as well) progress might not be quick, so long as there is progress though I'm happy to support the stategy Did you have a problem with the strategy of hiring Mcleish? Yes we're improving but again we seem to be pleased because we're aiming to be the sort of club we were when we wanted Doug gone. I think your arguments are flawed simply by the fact that you cannot see past your loathing for Lerner. And I think yours are incredibly flawed because of your support of Lerner. No, we could afford to spend the money on the basis that it was being spent wisely, i.e. on players that would perform well with a decent resale value, the trouble is too many of the players we bought fell into neither category, this isn't solely Lerner's fault but he does have to share the responsibility which I believe he would and does though we'll never know as he isn't Dave Whelan and doesn't yearn to be on TV. Progression is worthy of praise, we are where we are, no point in crying over spilt milk so grow up. I don't believe I'm wrong re TV money distribution, find me something to prove me wrong and I'll happily accept as such. Ummm, what has McLeish got to do with our current strategy? I can both support Lerner and accept that he's made mistakes, it's called a balanced opinion - you may want to look it up as it might just blow your mind. Edited June 20, 2013 by bannedfromHandV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 No, I'm not even talking about me Look BJ it doesn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 No, I'm not even talking about me Look BJ it doesn't matter. No you're talking about people I disagree with. You have a go at me for point blank refusing to accept anything being said by others. Well are others not point blank refusing to accept what I'm saying? Why do you not have a problem with them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 The majority of the money is split evenly across the division as I said though I accept that you were right also as there is an element of it (the merit column) that reflects on final league position - though I believe this is just the standard prize money on offer every year isn't it? Perhaps increased last season but all relative at the end of the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big_John_10 Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 I don't believe I'm wrong re TV money distribution, find me something to prove me wrong and I'll happily accept as such. Part of the tv money is equal and the other part of it is based on league finish. Our low league finish meant that other teams gained more money than us. We've allowed teams to overtake us in this and with FFP coming more into play this is obviously going to put us in a weaker position. The point was about him being a good owner. I disagreed on the basis that off the field more clubs are over taking us in terms of money they make and on the field we're finishing lower in the league. Money coming in and league placing. Probably 2 of the most important areas of a professional football club. Yet my arguments are are not cogent ones and lack credibility. The majority of the money is split evenly across the division as I said though I accept that you were right also as there is an element of it (the merit column) that reflects on final league position - though I believe this is just the standard prize money on offer every year isn't it? Perhaps increased last season but all relative at the end of the day. Yes I think we're both right in what we were saying with how tv money is split. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 I don't believe I'm wrong re TV money distribution, find me something to prove me wrong and I'll happily accept as such. Part of the tv money is equal and the other part of it is based on league finish. Our low league finish meant that other teams gained more money than us. We've allowed teams to overtake us in this and with FFP coming more into play this is obviously going to put us in a weaker position. The point was about him being a good owner. I disagreed on the basis that off the field more clubs are over taking us in terms of money they make and on the field we're finishing lower in the league. Money coming in and league placing. Probably 2 of the most important areas of a professional football club. Yet my arguments are are not cogent ones and lack credibility. The majority of the money is split evenly across the division as I said though I accept that you were right also as there is an element of it (the merit column) that reflects on final league position - though I believe this is just the standard prize money on offer every year isn't it? Perhaps increased last season but all relative at the end of the day. Yes I think we're both right in what we were saying with how tv money is split. But I think the point is that you're directing your anger solely at Lerner and holding him personally responsible. To read your posts you'd think he's a covert bluenose trying to sabotage the club, which personally speaking I don't think could be farther from the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 And Liverpool balanced that out by making it easier by dropping down the table. Liverpool are not what they were but they've still got the might. I know what you're saying but it's a bit of a stretch to say that where they started and where they fell to would put us above them in a pecking order. Everton are the only freaks thanks to Moyes who managed it. There was no mention of us in your post that I replied to. You said Man City made it harder due to their rise, which is true but it therefore follows that Liverpool's decline does the reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. That won't mean he is wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. That won't mean he is wrong though. No, it doesn't - but I think that it's important to see what other people think and I certainly would rethink my position if the vast majority of people disagreed with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOF Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 And Liverpool balanced that out by making it easier by dropping down the table.Liverpool are not what they were but they've still got the might. I know what you're saying but it's a bit of a stretch to say that where they started and where they fell to would put us above them in a pecking order. Everton are the only freaks thanks to Moyes who managed it. There was no mention of us in your post that I replied to. You said Man City made it harder due to their rise, which is true but it therefore follows that Liverpool's decline does the reverse.OK well to clarify, in the hierarchy Citeh went above us, Liverpool stayed above us. Both were in a stronger position than we were even if Liverpool's was slightly less so than previously. So while you're right in the literal sense, it wasn't in the context of the discussion where the landscape changed (i.e. Citeh starting off beneath us). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. That won't mean he is wrong though. No, it doesn't - but I think that it's important to see what other people think and I certainly would rethink my position if the vast majority of people disagreed with me. The vast majority of people? Or the majority of people posting in this particular thread at this particular time? The two are not the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 And Liverpool balanced that out by making it easier by dropping down the table. Liverpool are not what they were but they've still got the might. I know what you're saying but it's a bit of a stretch to say that where they started and where they fell to would put us above them in a pecking order. Everton are the only freaks thanks to Moyes who managed it. There was no mention of us in your post that I replied to. You said Man City made it harder due to their rise, which is true but it therefore follows that Liverpool's decline does the reverse. Chelsea, Spurs and Citeh have grown massively in the last ten years, yes Liverpool have declined but they're still a bigger club than us and are still finishing in the upper echelons give or take some of the more recent campaigns. As mentioned previously there was perhaps 3, maybe 4 'big clubs' to worry about, now there are 5 or 6 at least, 7 if you throw Everton in the mix though I would still say we're comparable with them as a club BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. That won't mean he is wrong though. No, it doesn't - but I think that it's important to see what other people think and I certainly would rethink my position if the vast majority of people disagreed with me. The vast majority of people? Or the majority of people posting in this particular thread at this particular time? The two are not the same. At a guess I would say the vast majority, no way to quantify it though of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 And Liverpool balanced that out by making it easier by dropping down the table. Liverpool are not what they were but they've still got the might. I know what you're saying but it's a bit of a stretch to say that where they started and where they fell to would put us above them in a pecking order. Everton are the only freaks thanks to Moyes who managed it. There was no mention of us in your post that I replied to. You said Man City made it harder due to their rise, which is true but it therefore follows that Liverpool's decline does the reverse. OK well to clarify, in the hierarchy Citeh went above us, Liverpool stayed above us. Both were in a stronger position than we were even if Liverpool's was slightly less so than previously. So while you're right in the literal sense, it wasn't in the context of the discussion where the landscape changed (i.e. Citeh starting off beneath us). So you are only talking relative to us? Well in that case we finished above Liverpool in 2009 and had we maintained our level we would have continued to stay ahead of them they weren't in a stronger position than us at that time. This point that Man City made it harder is often thrown up but rarely if ever is the counter balance of Liverpool made reference to because it is inconvenient in that it weakens this argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted June 20, 2013 Moderator Share Posted June 20, 2013 And Liverpool balanced that out by making it easier by dropping down the table. Liverpool are not what they were but they've still got the might. I know what you're saying but it's a bit of a stretch to say that where they started and where they fell to would put us above them in a pecking order. Everton are the only freaks thanks to Moyes who managed it. There was no mention of us in your post that I replied to. You said Man City made it harder due to their rise, which is true but it therefore follows that Liverpool's decline does the reverse. Chelsea, Spurs and Citeh have grown massively in the last ten years, yes Liverpool have declined but they're still a bigger club than us and are still finishing in the upper echelons give or take some of the more recent campaigns. As mentioned previously there was perhaps 3, maybe 4 'big clubs' to worry about, now there are 5 or 6 at least, 7 if you throw Everton in the mix though I would still say we're comparable with them as a club You see I just don't think the landscape has changed really, it is just our perspective. Newcastle managed top 5 two years ago. We just don't hold the same position we did previously, there is still a big 4 and a chasing pack. The names of the clubs in those two groups might be different now to it was in 2009 but ultimately the same competition remains. Although granted the cost to break into that group has increased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lexicon Posted June 20, 2013 Share Posted June 20, 2013 BJ, count the number of people who agree you and then count the number of people that disagree with you. Maybe it'll help. That won't mean he is wrong though. No, it doesn't - but I think that it's important to see what other people think and I certainly would rethink my position if the vast majority of people disagreed with me. The vast majority of people? Or the majority of people posting in this particular thread at this particular time? The two are not the same. I don't know Trent, ask them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts