The Randy Lerner thread

[DCJonah]

Excellent post Trent.

I think if someone opts to purchase palace while we're available it's because they don't see value in the amount Lerner is asking for.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

Why do they? Fulham & Charlton didn't earn more than us when in the premier league.

With Fulham, their stadium is located slap-bang in the heart of the most expensive area in London. Even if they were relegated to the conference, the owner could still recoup most of his money just by selling it.

The most expensive area in London? Nope.

[Shaw_nuff]

 

Why do they? Fulham & Charlton didn't earn more than us when in the premier league.

With Fulham, their stadium is located slap-bang in the heart of the most expensive area in London. Even if they were relegated to the conference, the owner could still recoup most of his money just by selling it.

 

The London bubble is actually starting to deflate. It's just that the official figures are a few months behind. Investment in London re property speculation at the moment would be highly precarious, so I don't believe that would have anything to do with it.

[Isa]

Why do they? Fulham & Charlton didn't earn more than us when in the premier league.

With Fulham, their stadium is located slap-bang in the heart of the most expensive area in London. Even if they were relegated to the conference, the owner could still recoup most of his money just by selling it.

The most expensive area in London? Nope.

Which part of London is more expensive than Kensington and it's immediate surroundings? You may be right but even if so then it is still one of the most expensive areas.

The London bubble is actually starting to deflate. It's just that the official figures are a few months behind. Investment in London re property speculation at the moment would be highly precarious, so I don't believe that would have anything to do with it.

I'm pretty sure that property investment from the Gulf and Far East investors is as high as it's ever been. Or so I keep reading.

[Morley_crosses_to_Withe]

Craven Cottage is in the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea is next to it. But yes - it's an expensive part of London nonetheless. I was just being pedantic.

Edited October 26, 2014 by Morley_crosses_to_Withe

[suttonpaul]

We can't keep talking about this it is OT

[TRO]

 

Could you possibly explain what conditions you refer too, as the only ones I can think of is unconditionally funding poor players until we eventually by way of trial an error get it right.

Sounds like I'm defending him ,but I'm not....I just don' t think that the restricted funds need to be as damaging as you allude to...Sanchez, Vlaar,and Okore are all very similar priced....2 are not in the team,and seem unlikely to be imminently and one is one of our best players....is that funds or talent spotting?

 

 

You seem to be misunderstanding my point, I'm not just referring to the impact on the current manager, I'm not.

 

Lerner has over a number of years through his poor management of the club created conditions in which we are now simply hoping to stay in the division.

 

No offense intended but I'm not going to recap his mistakes over the last 8 years, they've been done to death and everyone knows them. 

 

The way he has run the club, the decisions he has made, his lack of financial control, they have all contributed to the position we find ourselves in. They have all contributed to the conditions each of his managers have worked, managers he is responsible for having appointed.

 

So no, he isn't directly responsible for team performances or the players performances or even the individual signings of players nobody claims he is but as I said he is responsible for not only those who have been appointed to run the team but the conditions under which they have worked. 

You may not agree with the criticism of him, as is your right but please don't misrepresent that criticism as somehow being based upon the performance of the team in matches. 

 

As for the here and now, Sanchez is being written off far too prematurely and will soon be featuring while Okore simply isn't ready after a serious injury but that is stuff for different threads.

 

 

 

I respect your view Trent, I really do....but you are right we disagree....but more on the levels of criticism than the criticism itself.

 

I personally feel more of what we have done wrong as aimed at the managers rather than the owner, you seem to be the other way around as far as I can see.

 

I am not negating Lerner from all blame and I am well aware he is responsible for the managerial appointments, that I am at odds with, but once the appointment is made its down to the managers, just like they say, once they cross that line its down to the players.

 

I understand that the owner is responsible for the " conditions" that the manager has to work under....but despite pockets of success, you can hardly say that HDE and Ron Bendall created ideal  conditions for  their managers to work in.

 

I look at Bill Kenwright and I ask myself....is it that he creates the right conditions for his managers to work in... or is it that he appoints the right managers to make it right or get the best out of the situation?....I have my suspicions its the latter.

 

I have never been overly struck in what I have seen from Lerners appointments..i.e signings, tactics, model, performance,results ( particularly at home)etc

 

If you are saying its all his fault, because of his appointments, i would be more inclined to agree.

[TrentVilla]

I respect your view Trent, I really do....but you are right we disagree....but more on the levels of criticism than the criticism itself.

 

I personally feel more of what we have done wrong as aimed at the managers rather than the owner, you seem to be the other way around as far as I can see.

 

 

Cheers and likewise, it is nice to have a real discussion on something and even disagree without it getting nasty/silly/personal etc.

 

Yes for me Lerner is ultimately and while not entirely responsible, predominately responsible for where we are now and the state we are in. He allowed O'Neill to waste money and spend money we didn't have, he appointed two managers following him.

 

Now I'm certainly not absolving any of those managers or Lambert from blame or saying that they've didn't all make mistakes but as his appointments and as they were working under his 'control' then ultimately the blame lies with him for their performance for me.

 

I would also add that his appointment, promotion and seeming trust in Paul Faulkner was another example of his poor judgement, recruitment and management.

 

From what I'm led to believe, Lerner's mind at times changes with the wind and the last few years show that in much of what he has done.

 

 

I am not negating Lerner from all blame and I am well aware he is responsible for the managerial appointments, that I am at odds with, but once the appointment is made its down to the managers, just like they say, once they cross that line its down to the players.

 

That ultimately is where we disagree. I don't think it is all down to the manager once they are appointed just as I don't think it is all down to the players once they are on the pitch. 

 

 

I understand that the owner is responsible for the " conditions" that the manager has to work under....but despite pockets of success, you can hardly say that HDE and Ron Bendall created ideal  conditions for  their managers to work in.

 

No they didn't, the club has been run badly for 30 years at least probably a lot longer and those owners like the managers they appointed share the responsibility for that but ultimately the buck stops with the man calling the shots. Just as a manager is questioned when his players fail to perform so too should a chairman/owner when his appointments do and more their performance is hampered by the actions of that owner.

 

That we've had bad/worse owners before Lerner doesn't or shouldn't detract from the assessment that Lerner has also ultimately been a bad owner for us despite what I'm sure are good intentions.

 

I look at Bill Kenwright and I ask myself....is it that he creates the right conditions for his managers to work in... or is it that he appoints the right managers to make it right or get the best out of the situation?....I have my suspicions its the latter.

 

I think it is both. Kenwright made the right call in appointing Moyes (or got lucky depending on how you look at it) but he also created the right conditions for him to manage the club.

 

For a start, he set a budget within his and the clubs means both in terms of spending and wages. Yes this was largely due to a lack of money at the club or in his own pocket but he was sensible, he was realistic and he crucially exercised control I don't think I need draw a comparison to Lerner.

 

Kenwright also stood by Moyes through some difficult seasons/times in the early days and that really did help create the right conditions for the club and manager. Ironically, whatever people think of Lambert and his contract extension Lerner's running of the club is now not all that dissimilar to Kenwrights, it just took him 7 years to figure out what he was doing.

 

If you are saying its all his fault, because of his appointments, i would be more inclined to agree.

 

I'm confused. That has never really been my position, but if it were that seems further away from your position than where I'm at which leaves me confused why you would be more inclined to agree with it.

[TRO]

Randy Lerner is like a chameleon he has changed...The first 4 years were very much different from the last 4 years....The first 4 were not austerity....the second 4 years was and very much as a result of the problems attributed to buying and selling of players in the that period.

 

If I was comparing Aston villa with Everton.....I would be more inclined to attribute their success over us on the basis of their managers than the owners. If you say that they have spent more on individuals than us, you would be right.... but is that due to the prudency of the managers sales or the chairmans pocket?

Edited October 26, 2014 by TRO

[suttonpaul]

Randy Lerner is like a chameleon he has changed...The first 4 years were very much different from the last 4 years....The first 4 were not austerity....the second 4 years was and very much as a result of the problems attributed to buying and selling of players in the that period.

If I was comparing Aston villa with Everton.....I would be more inclined to attribute their success over us on the basis of their managers than the owners. If you say that they have spent more on individuals than us, you would be right.... but is that due to the prudency of the managers sales or the chairmans pocket?

Definitely the manager

[TrentVilla]

Randy Lerner is like a chameleon he has changed...The first 4 years were very much different from the last 4 years....The first 4 were not austerity....the second 4 years was and very much as a result of the problems attributed to buying and selling of players in the that period.

 

If I was comparing Aston villa with Everton.....I would be more inclined to attribute their success over us on the basis of their managers than the owners. If you say that they have spent more on individuals than us, you would be right.... but is that due to the prudency of the managers sales or the chairmans pocket?

 

No I know that the first 4 years weren't but as I've already stated, it was the lack of financial control in those years by Lerner that set the conditions under which the managers were forced to work for the next 4 years. Terrible management of the club by Lerner.

 

That means Moyes was provided with a far more stable environment in which a football club could be built. 

 

Yes the success Everton had on the pitch was down to Moyes but I'm baffled how anyone can't see the different between how Everton and Villa have been run and the fact that it has a barring on what happens on the football side of the club. 

 

You talk about prudence of managers but it isn't for managers to budget/set budgets that is for those above them, if you keep giving any manager money he is likely to go and spend it unless its Wenger obviously.

Yes our managers have wasted money compared to Moyes but that is going to happen when you chop and change players and when you lurch in styles of manager from O'Neill to Houllier to McLeish. 

[omariqy]

There's actually been a slowdown in the London property market at the higher end.  A lot of foreign investors have withdrawn from the property market and the numbers entering have reduced. 

[SikhInTrinity]

The problem with buying Villa is the expectation it would bring, the money it would need to appease fans. No offence to Palace but it's easier for an owner to progress at a slower pace due to the size of the club. As in reality on the pitch Villa and Palace are at a similar level.

[DCJonah]

The problem with buying Villa is the expectation it would bring, the money it would need to appease fans. No offence to Palace but it's easier for an owner to progress at a slower pace due to the size of the club. As in reality on the pitch Villa and Palace are at a similar level.

Then surely as the owner you lower the asking price to make it more appealing. 

[SikhInTrinity]

 

The problem with buying Villa is the expectation it would bring, the money it would need to appease fans. No offence to Palace but it's easier for an owner to progress at a slower pace due to the size of the club. As in reality on the pitch Villa and Palace are at a similar level.

Then surely as the owner you lower the asking price to make it more appealing. 

 

 

Why would he? Compare our facilities to Crystal Palace, massive differences, attendances etc. This isn't Harris rejecting Villa, it's more him choosing a club he can afford to build up, rather than the mass investment we need. Even if he bought it for 70M, our fans would expect huge amounts to be spent immediately.

[briny_ear]

 if you keep giving any manager money he is likely to go and spend it unless its Wenger obviously.

 

 

 

Edited October 27, 2014 by briny_ear

[suttonpaul]

which leads you nicely back to the question of differing incomes and FFP rules which is why it is so important

[dn1982]

Randy Lerner is like a chameleon he has changed...The first 4 years were very much different from the last 4 years....The first 4 were not austerity....the second 4 years was and very much as a result of the problems attributed to buying and selling of players in the that period.

 

If I was comparing Aston villa with Everton.....I would be more inclined to attribute their success over us on the basis of their managers than the owners. If you say that they have spent more on individuals than us, you would be right.... but is that due to the prudency of the managers sales or the chairmans pocket?

 

No I know that the first 4 years weren't but as I've already stated, it was the lack of financial control in those years by Lerner that set the conditions under which the managers were forced to work for the next 4 years. Terrible management of the club by Lerner.

 

That means Moyes was provided with a far more stable environment in which a football club could be built. 

 

Yes the success Everton had on the pitch was down to Moyes but I'm baffled how anyone can't see the different between how Everton and Villa have been run and the fact that it has a barring on what happens on the football side of the club. 

 

You talk about prudence of managers but it isn't for managers to budget/set budgets that is for those above them, if you keep giving any manager money he is likely to go and spend it unless its Wenger obviously.

Yes our managers have wasted money compared to Moyes but that is going to happen when you chop and change players and when you lurch in styles of manager from O'Neill to Houllier to McLeish.

Great discussion lads. Hopefully we are at the start of a diiferent 4 year cycle with the lessons learnt from the previous 2!

[Risso]

 

 

The problem with buying Villa is the expectation it would bring, the money it would need to appease fans. No offence to Palace but it's easier for an owner to progress at a slower pace due to the size of the club. As in reality on the pitch Villa and Palace are at a similar level.

Then surely as the owner you lower the asking price to make it more appealing. 

 

 

Why would he? Compare our facilities to Crystal Palace, massive differences, attendances etc. This isn't Harris rejecting Villa, it's more him choosing a club he can afford to build up, rather than the mass investment we need. Even if he bought it for 70M, our fans would expect huge amounts to be spent immediately.

 

 

I don't think the fans' wishes would count for anything much at all these days.  TV money is all important to owners and potential buyers.  When you're guaranteed at least £60m a year from the Sky deal, £3m either way from 5,000 extra fans a week is small change.  Unless Lerner starts spending again soon, I think we're buggered, because I can't see anybody wanting to buy a club with little potential for growth, unless it's a Middle Eastern vanity project.

[blandy]

I don't think the fans' wishes would count for anything much at all these days.  TV money is all important to owners and potential buyers.  When you're guaranteed at least £60m a year from the Sky deal, £3m either way from 5,000 extra fans a week is small change.  Unless Lerner starts spending again soon, I think we're buggered, because I can't see anybody wanting to buy a club with little potential for growth....

You may or may not be right about being bought, but the bits in bold don't make sense (i.e. I don't understand your point, sorry.). Could you explain, please?

 

Are you saying if lerner was to spend there would be potential for growth?

And if so, then why wouldn't someone buying the club also have that same chance to make growth happen?

 

And if you're not saying that, then what's the point of anyone (including lerner) spending? And if there's no point, then why criticise him for not spending?