The Randy Lerner thread

[Dr_Pangloss]

Mike Ashley is a LOT richer than Lerner.

Well according to Forbes, Ashley's net worth is $3.5 bn as of March 2013. I can't find any comparable data for Lerner but according to the reliable wikipedia his worth was £1.1 bn (at some point last year), not reliable conversion but using current exchange rate that's around $1.8 bn.

 

So yeah, Ashley is most likely to be significantly richer than Lerner, at least as far as 'net worth' is concerned.

Edited January 11, 2014 by Dr_Pangloss

[Nabby]

What we are doing seems similar to what happened at first under Ashley ..of course that ended with relegation.

[markavfc40]

 

Mmm, and no.

The club's been worse, a lot worse. But you have a point, it's not exactly pulling up trees. It's below where we'd like and where we all think it could, should and ought to be.

The main thing I take issue with is that it's "all" Randy Lerner's fault. It just isn't IMO

If we won the league, it wouldn't be all his credit. If we "fail" it's not all his fault. The same factors apply.

That's not defending him, for the sake of it, just pointing out that Villa's fortunes depend and are affected by more than one soul. Anyone who thinks differently, go ahead....persuade me it's only Randy and all Randy's fault.

He's ultimately responsible for the club, but he's not in control of results, and nor is any owner/CEO/chairman.

Randy didn't cause us to lose to Sheffield Utd. The Sheff Utd. chairman didn't cause them to (deservedly) beat us last saturday. Players, managers, others share the story.

 

 

 As ever there is much to agree with in Pete's post.

 

The impact an owner can have in terms of what goes on on the pitch is that they appoint the manager and then give him the necessary tools to do the job. Those tools would primarily be allowing him to bring in his own coaching staff, funding in terms of fees and wages for players and providing excellent training facilities.

I think therefore Lerner has done well with some things. He has certainly ensured we have training facilities up there with the best in the country. He has always allowed managers to bring in their own coaching staff. He has also at times given good backing to managers. Certainly in the case of O'Neill and Houllier.

His biggest downfall has been the managerial choices he has made. Whether O'Neill was his choice I genuinely don't know but I am not sure it matters. Houllier and McLeish were and for differing reasons they were the wrong choices. Houllier was a known cheque book manager at a time we wanted to cut costs and McLeish was well McLeish.

The jury is still out with Lambert.

In terms of finances overall looking back there is no doubting that Lerner was at best naive to allow spending to get to a level we couldn't sustain. Some blame O'Neill for that. However the wage bill was added to substantially during the season after he left. Regardless of that the point where we blame a manager that left 4 years ago for our current woes passed some time ago. There has not been a player at the club this season who is on a contract that was signed whilst O'Neill was manager. There were just two last year in Dunne and Petrov.

It really though is way past the time that this great club started to look forward. Looking at where we are now as a club, and have been for the last 3 years, is simply not good enough. Lessons of past mistakes need to be learned. This club though has spent too long dusting itself down. It is time for us to kick on again and start acting like a club of our stature should. That for me is seeking to at the very least get back up amongst the top 6/7 clubs in the country.

The owner is certainly the one that will ultimately trigger any revival that can see us come out of this slumber of being relegation battling lower table fodder. By backing the right manager with some substantial funding to bring in quality players this will reignite the fires which will be felt throughout the club in terms of renewed optimism and a real passion to see us rise again. Unfortunately I don't see that happening under Lerner but everyday I hope he will start to prove me wrong.

Edited January 11, 2014 by markavfc40

[Guest]

As ever there is much to agree with in Pete's post.

The impact an owner can have in terms of what goes on on the pitch is that they appoint the manager and then give him the necessary tools to do the job. Those tools would primarily be allowing him to bring in his own coaching staff, funding in terms of fees and wages for players and providing excellent training facilities.

I think therefore Lerner has done well with some things. He has certainly ensured we have training facilities up there with the best in the country. He has always allowed managers to bring in their own coaching staff. He has also at times given good backing to managers. Certainly in the case of O'Neill and Houllier.

His biggest downfall has been the managerial choices he has made. Whether O'Neill was his choice I genuinely don't know but I am not sure it matters. Houllier and McLeish were and for differing reasons they were the wrong choices. Houllier was a known cheque book manager at a time we wanted to cut costs and McLeish was well McLeish.

The jury is still out with Lambert.

In terms of finances overall looking back there is no doubting that Lerner was at best naive to allow spending to get to a level we couldn't sustain. Some blame O'Neill for that. However the wage bill was added to substantially during the season after he left. Regardless of that the point where we blame a manager that left 4 years ago for our current woes passed some time ago. There has not been a player at the club this season who is on a contract that was signed whilst O'Neill was manager. There were just two last year in Dunne and Petrov.

It really though is way past the time that this great club started to look forward. Looking at where we are now as a club, and have been for the last 3 years, is simply not good enough. Lessons of past mistakes need to be learned. This club though has spent too long dusting itself down. It is time for us to kick on again and start acting like a club of our stature should. That for me is seeking to at the very least get back up amongst the top 6/7 clubs in the country.

The owner is certainly the one that will ultimately trigger any revival that can see us come out of this slumber of being relegation battling lower table fodder. By backing the right manager with some substantial funding to bring in quality players this will reignite the fires which will be felt throughout the club in terms of renewed optimism and a real passion to see us rise again. Unfortunately I don't see that happening under Lerner but everyday I hope he will start to prove me wrong.

Another good post Mark.

[TRO]

Mmm, and no.

The club's been worse, a lot worse. But you have a point, it's not exactly pulling up trees. It's below where we'd like and where we all think it could, should and ought to be.

The main thing I take issue with is that it's "all" Randy Lerner's fault. It just isn't IMO

If we won the league, it wouldn't be all his credit. If we "fail" it's not all his fault. The same factors apply.

That's not defending him, for the sake of it, just pointing out that Villa's fortunes depend and are affected by more than one soul. Anyone who thinks differently, go ahead....persuade me it's only Randy and all Randy's fault.

He's ultimately responsible for the club, but he's not in control of results, and nor is any owner/CEO/chairman.

Randy didn't cause us to lose to Sheffield Utd. The Sheff Utd. chairman didn't cause them to (deservedly) beat us last saturday. Players, managers, others share the story.

 

 As ever there is much to agree with in Pete's post.

 

The impact an owner can have in terms of what goes on on the pitch is that they appoint the manager and then give him the necessary tools to do the job. Those tools would primarily be allowing him to bring in his own coaching staff, funding in terms of fees and wages for players and providing excellent training facilities.

I think therefore Lerner has done well with some things. He has certainly ensured we have training facilities up there with the best in the country. He has always allowed managers to bring in their own coaching staff. He has also at times given good backing to managers. Certainly in the case of O'Neill and Houllier.

His biggest downfall has been the managerial choices he has made. Whether O'Neill was his choice I genuinely don't know but I am not sure it matters. Houllier and McLeish were and for differing reasons they were the wrong choices. Houllier was a known cheque book manager at a time we wanted to cut costs and McLeish was well McLeish.

The jury is still out with Lambert.

In terms of finances overall looking back there is no doubting that Lerner was at best naive to allow spending to get to a level we couldn't sustain. Some blame O'Neill for that. However the wage bill was added to substantially during the season after he left. Regardless of that the point where we blame a manager that left 4 years ago for our current woes passed some time ago. There has not been a player at the club this season who is on a contract that was signed whilst O'Neill was manager. There were just two last year in Dunne and Petrov.

It really though is way past the time that this great club started to look forward. Looking at where we are now as a club, and have been for the last 3 years, is simply not good enough. Lessons of past mistakes need to be learned. This club though has spent too long dusting itself down. It is time for us to kick on again and start acting like a club of our stature should. That for me is seeking to at the very least get back up amongst the top 6/7 clubs in the country.

The owner is certainly the one that will ultimately trigger any revival that can see us come out of this slumber of being relegation battling lower table fodder. By backing the right manager with some substantial funding to bring in quality players this will reignite the fires which will be felt throughout the club in terms of renewed optimism and a real passion to see us rise again. Unfortunately I don't see that happening under Lerner but everyday I hope he will start to prove me wrong.

Top drawer

[GENTLEMAN]

If Lerner is seriously looking to sell the club, why not officially announce it? The fans need some honest clarity from Lerner.

[Supervillan78]

I'm as fed up with Lerner, as he is with AVFC. His relationship with the club/fans is really unhealthy and as such its time for him to go!

[Wainy316]

I just want the man to talk to us.

[dukes]

Lerner should have had the bollocks to sack O'Neill after his third season if he was that unhappy with the money spent and where we were in the league. We should have been top 4 with all that money spent or at least setting up the club for long term success and sustainability in at least the top 6. Lerner is an idiot who never quite understood how to run a football club and now thinks he can take the US sports approach of selling off the top earners and bringing through young players who will eventually mature into a good team. The only problems are a thing called relegation and a terrible recruitment system which leaves us with mediore players with little prospect of success.

 

Taking away the spats from the more 'regular' posters, for me this quote sums up everything that is wrong with modern football fans.

 

Calling Lerner an idiot is both incorrect and disrespectful.

 

I also suggest that the current drive towards the Premier League equivalent of Moneyball is a plan that the board, the manager and his staff have drawn up jointly, and comments made by Lambert since his appointment seem to back that up. They were quite right to do it too, and i would say that at the end of last season when we actually started to play some decent football most of us thought we'd turned the corner and would build from there. IMO, the problems this season (apart from injuries) have come because Lambert again bought quantity (7 players) rather than quality, and unsettled the players that had developed through the 2012-2013 season. I understand that at times last season we seemed light on numbers, and this year with injuries we've still been light on numbers at times (in defence), but the scouting (for which Lambert is responsible) that led to Lambert buying Kozak, Helenius, Tonev, Luna, Bacuna, Okore, and Steer seems seriously flawed.

 

Kozak, and Helenius were not really needed, and at times Lambert has seemed reluctant to play them anyway, Tonev, Luna and Bacuna are not an improvement on what we already had, Luna in particular seems to be going backwards and is worse than Lichaj and Bennett at left back. Bacuna has a good freekick, and might develop into a half decent midfielder, but i doubt he'll be better than the players we already have in midfield, and he is certainly not a right back (Lambert wants shooting for persevering with him in that role as it seems to have shot the kids confidence). Okore looked a good buy for us that he got injured.

 

The key thing here is that Lambert spent £20M in the summer, £4.5M on Okore, and the rest has been wasted on players that did not take us forward in any way at all.

 

The so called Moneyball plan can work, but the manager and his staff have to be able to make it work, Wenger is probably the ultimate example of someone who in the past has worked the system well, attracting young talent from Europe and turning them into great footballers (Febregas for £500k, Van Persie for £2.5M, Anelka for £500k, Kolo Toure for £150k, Patrick Vierra for £3.5M, Gael Cliche for £250k, even Nicolas Bendtner for £200k is a bargain), the thing is littered in with these signings were bigger money buys, and i think that was/is to be the next phase of the plan for Villa. I'm not suggesting that Villa will suddenly start spending £20M on one player, but i think the way to play this game is to buy a few players at £1M - £3M and then add to the squad with one or two players in the £7 - £10M bracket.

 

If Lerner is to blame for not providing enough funds to Lambert, then Lambert is to blame for wasting a good chunk of what he has been given (£44M), yes he's made some good signings, last season i think Lowton, Benteke and Westwood were all good for us, also Sylla, but he's also made a lot of pointless and poor siginings (Bowery, Dawkins, and the others mentioned earlier). Lerner cannot be to blame for who the manager chooses to buy. 

 

Lambert and his staff must also be to blame for the drop in form of those players that seemed so good last season, the contracst in form this season of Lowton, Westwood, Sylla, Weimann is stark ! Lambert must also be to blame for the negative tactics, for the lack of a plan B, and for the general lack of energy throughout the team, how can you blame Lerner for any of that ?

 

£44M is a decent amount of money, Lambert chose to buy 15 players with that money (plus Holman, and the loan of Dawkins), that's an average of £3M per player. Overall, I think we and our owner should expect better from that investment, and much much better in performances on the pitch.

 

Lerner has his faults, but with the amount of money he has invested in Aston Villa anyone that thinks he no longer cares is in my opinion crazy, i would think Lerner cares every bit as much as we fans do (maybe for different reasons), I fully expect that if we don't see an improvement between now and the end of the season we will see Lambert moved on, the timing would be right as it looks like the wages to turnover ratio is where it needed to be, and the debt seems also to have diminished (one way or another). This summer (when Lambert is 2 years into his 3 year contract) unless there is a massive upturn in performances i expect we'll either be sold, or a new manager will be brought in with a bigger (but sensible) budget.

 

Oh, and one other thing, is it me or has the quality of our signings dropped since Henke left ?

[samjp26]

Good post Dukes but I can't help but point out a major contradiction. You say that "Lambert chose to spend £44m on 15 players" - but before this you already acknowledge that it was probably a plan made by the board and Randy as well as Lambert and his staff. I've posted direct quotes before and I won't keep doing so, but Randy himself said last January that the plan to rebuild was always going to happen, it was a plan made by the board and it would have happened even if Lambert wasn't the man who got the managerial post.

 

Your idea about buying a large amount of players for small figures (around £3m or less) and a smaller amount of players for larger figures (of around £7m or so) is one I agree with. The thing is, Lambert has had to build the squad on £44m and he did not choose to do so. We're already the team in the league who has used the least amount of different players this season, which I think goes to show how 'thin' our squad is even after buying 15 players - which averages out at around £3m per player as you say. If 15 players averages out at £3m a pop, it would mean if Lambert spent more on somewhat better players we'd have less overall and an even smaller squad.

Edited January 12, 2014 by samjp26

[dukes]

Good post Dukes but I can't help but point out a major contradiction. You say that "Lambert chose to spend £44m on 15 players" - but before this you already acknowledge that it was probably a plan made by the board and Randy as well as Lambert and his staff. I've posted direct quotes before and I won't keep doing so, but Randy himself said last January that the plan to rebuild was always going to happen, it was a plan made by the board and it would have happened even if Lambert wasn't the man who got the managerial post.

 

Your idea about buying a large amount of players for small figures (around £3m or less) and a smaller amount of players for larger figures (of around £7m or so) is one I agree with. The thing is, Lambert has had to build the squad on £44m and he did not choose to do so. We're already the team in the league who has used the least amount of different players this season, which I think goes to show how 'thin' our squad is even after buying 15 players - which averages out at around £3m per player as you say. If 15 players averages out at £3m a pop, it would mean if Lambert spent more on somewhat better players we'd have less overall and an even smaller squad.

 

 

1. Yes the plan was probably drawn up by the board, but Lambert must have signed up to it (presumably during his interview), otherwise why would he have bothered to come ?

 

2. The bigger point is had lamber not wasted money on players that were not good enough or were not going to play, he could have spent more money on less players and played them, and this would have made a bigger difference.

 

3. I htink the reason we've used less players is because we're so one dimensional, if we changed formation more we'd have had to use different players (Helenius and Sylla are two that have hardly had a kick).

[Supervillan78]

 Lambert has stated that the club have enquired about players he'd like to bring in, but the finances just haven't been there. I don't think the problem is Lambert because the club has been in crisis ever since MON left.

Edited January 12, 2014 by Supervillan78

[samjp26]

Answer to 1:

Of course he knew, I'm not saying he didn't, what I am trying to say is that it wasn't his idea to do this.

 

Answer to 2:

But then we'd have less players, as you've seen this season so far we've been hit with quite a few injuries and we're most likely going to play Lowton at CB on Monday. Imagine if we had less players than we already have! As much as I agree that quality could be better, we're lucky that we have players like Bacuna who are able to play in different positions. 

 

Answer to 3:

I agree that we're one dimensional and that players like Helenius and Sylla should be utilised, especially in times where we aren't doing well and clearly need to change something up. Personally I'd like to see Sylla played as a real defensive midfielder in front of the defence and Helenius played as a supporting striker to aid Benteke. The latter is something I think we may see on Monday after Helenius came on and scored the other day.

 

Rebuilding a squad from the bottom up was never going to be an easy job and I'll admit that I'm still unsure on Lambert and his tactics myself if he is the man to take the club forward. What I won't do is judge the squad he has built or decide whether or not I think he is the right man to take us forward until the end of the season. We're playing a team now that is completely different to the one he started with apart from Gabby, who is the only starting player left in our regular 11.

 

If we're still up and away from the relegation zone come the end of the season, I'd say Lambert and his staff have done well to completely overhaul our squad with such a small amount of money when compared to teams around us whilst staying in the Premier League. That won't mean I'll automatically think he is the best man to take us forward from there, but again it all depends on whether there is actually a plan to go forward and that plan can only be made by the board/Randy.

Edited January 12, 2014 by samjp26

[AshVilla]

I just want the man to talk to us.

 

[SeanO]

Lerner gave Lambert some funds in the summer to improve the side a bit - he bought quite a few players for this money, some obviously to be squad players/competition and others to play in the first team. 

 

The fact is:

 

- We started off with some absolutely **** horrible fixtures (Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool first three games) and made a decent fist of it. 

- Shortly after this, we lose one first choice CB who looked pretty damn good; despite this we get 7 points from the next 3 games.

- A couple of wobbly games against decent opponents and we go on a 5 game unbeaten run, taking 9 points from 5.

- Vlaar gets injured, so our other first choice CB is out, leaving a couple of young, relatively inexperienced CBs in a team with its captain out and no other leader there. We lose 5 on the bounce.

- 4 points from the last 2 in the league sees us sitting in 11th, despite only having Vlaar for 70 minutes.

 

The picture I'm painting here and the question I'm asking, is what team doesn't do a lot worse when their first choice CBs are out? How can you assume that both of them are going to get injuries? It's hideous luck. 

At the end of the day, Randy put in some cash and we bought quite a few players in the summer, whilst getting rid of more of the shit, overpaid ones - Randy did what he needed to do and I don't see why the problems we have are his fault. 

Everybody seemed to be in favour of a root and branch change of the playing staff and taking the problems it produces on the chin but so few are willing to stick it out when the going gets tough. I think Randy and Lambert are doing the right thing, as evidenced by our league position, but there is still a long way to go. There's no doubt we can play good football, the players have shown previously that they're capable of it and we've had some horrible luck with injuries so far. I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt until the end of the transfer window next summer - when we can start looking at spending more money on fewer players, because we're not worried about how paper thin the squad used to be. 

 

I can go with this IF Lambert brings in cover at CH this window.

[dukes]

Answer to 1:

Of course he knew, I'm not saying he didn't, what I am trying to say is that it wasn't his idea to do this.

 

Answer to 2:

But then we'd have less players, as you've seen this season so far we've been hit with quite a few injuries and we're most likely going to play Lowton at CB on Monday. Imagine if we had less players than we already have! As much as I agree that quality could be better, we're lucky that we have players like Bacuna who are able to play in different positions. 

 

Answer to 3:

I agree that we're one dimensional and that players like Helenius and Sylla should be utilised, especially in times where we aren't doing well and clearly need to change something up. Personally I'd like to see Sylla played as a real defensive midfielder in front of the defence and Helenius played as a supporting striker to aid Benteke. The latter is something I think we may see on Monday after Helenius came on and scored the other day.

 

Rebuilding a squad from the bottom up was never going to be an easy job and I'll admit that I'm still unsure on Lambert and his tactics myself if he is the man to take the club forward. What I won't do is judge the squad he has built or decide whether or not I think he is the right man to take us forward until the end of the season. We're playing a team now that is completely different to the one he started with apart from Gabby, who is the only starting player left in our regular 11.

 

If we're still up and away from the relegation zone come the end of the season, I'd say Lambert and his staff have done well to completely overhaul our squad with such a small amount of money when compared to teams around us whilst staying in the Premier League. That won't mean I'll automatically think he is the best man to take us forward from there, but again it all depends on whether there is actually a plan to go forward and that plan can only be made by the board and Randy.

 

I totally agree.

 

for answer 2 though, would we have less players or would we just blood our own youngsters ? We have a squad of 30 players, only 20 have played in the league.

[samjp26]

Well yeah, we'd have to blood the youngsters, but as things stand it doesn't seem like they're ready or surely some of them would have been more prominent roles. It'd be more than blooding the youngsters I think, more like sending them out to be slaughtered. Look at West Ham the other day for example in the cup, it was a disaster for them but Allardyce is adamant that there was no alternative and all they could do was play their youngsters. I'd say they arguably have a more experienced squad than we do but of course we have similar squads in terms of numbers. Strange thing is though they've actually only got 5 players out injured now with Carroll back, we've got 7 out, 5 of whom are defenders and 1 is our captain.

 

Obviously it is down to bad luck but just imagine if our squad was any smaller or if we had to rely on our youth team, we'd probably be seeing results similar to what West Ham did the other day but on a much more regular basis.

Edited January 12, 2014 by samjp26

[dukes]

True enough, but would the youngsters do any worse than lets say Bacuna at right back ? Or Lowton at Centre back ? Surely these are the times when players like Donacien come to the fore ?

 

Of course some f them won't be up to it, but when will we find out if we don't play them ? I'm not saying lets field 5 academy players, but we have players like Caruthers who looked decent a few years ago, but has found his path to first team football blocked under Lambert, and by who exactly ?

 

Man Utd have a history of blooding youngsters at 18, yet we seem to want to wait until they're 22 and by the  it's too late. only by testing them against much better players will we know if they have the capability to develop.

[lexicon]

 

but what you seem to be failing or unwilling to see is that we're in the middle of a massive rebuild.

Have I? I accept we're cutting costs but you assume its part of a plan that will see us competitive again whereas I haven't seen much evidence of that. Also that's fine but this massive rebuild is because of the owners past decision making which he should be held responsible for.

Comparing us to other clubs is a waste of time but to humour you; Everton - didn't have the older, overpaid problem players and a much more settled side that was built up over years by David Moyes. Newcastle - relegated, had to get rid of a shitload of overpaid players and made some good signings but then it's easier as Ashley is a lot richer than Randy.

You've missed the point. Those of you that continue to defend Lerner and seem happy with the plan to spend what we can afford in the future, fail to acknowledge that he's put us in a position where this strategy will make it a lot harder to financially compete. Our poor league finishes are allowing other teams to build a financial advantage on us which makes this new plan so many of you are pleased with nothing but a battle to achieve mid table mediocrity.

 

 

No, I think you've missed the point - we aren't going to have to sign so many players next summer, so the money we do have to spend can be spent in fewer places - hence this 'rebuild' and the fact that it takes time. Short term we needed bodies and numbers to replace the older, overpaid shit - we had to spend what we did on those because you need a squad. That's done, pretty much - now we can concentrate on slower, organic improvement of the squad - if we spent what we did last summer on 3 players next summer, we'll more than likely have some much better players. It's a long term game this. 

You should take a look at this to understand how the finances/league positions work: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2327063/Premier-League-prize-money-table-final-game-2013-season.html   -  you needn't be so worried at this point in our development because we just need to stay up, in all honesty. I'm pretty certain we'll be in a much better position next season.

[lexicon]

Are you making up posts?  Mike Ashley has no where near as much money as Lerner. Also from the O'neil debarcle Villa have spent a hell of alot more money on transfers than Newcastle have.

 

Its all down to not having top experienced football people at the club. Many Owners in the league are not footballing savvy but its the people behind them that run the club. No footballing man would have employed McLeish for villa this decision was made by someone with no history of football.

Dont get me wrong Villa have made some terrible decisions, but Lerner is being advised very badly and im not sure why this is still happening...............

 

 

All you needed to do was to go on google and check and you couldn't even be bothered to do that - why should anyone bother reading your posts if you're not bothered about accuracy?