Villa Signings and General Rumours Thread

Peyton Manning

Raekwon wrote: »

I see that Man City have finally signed Benjani from Pompey for £3.87m. Villa could have signed him & Routledge with the cash that we got from the Cahill deal. But I guess he is not the type of player MON is looking for

Well I think if your aspirations are to challenge for a Uefa cup place with hopes of upping it a notch and challenging for fourth in the long run, then Benjani and Routledge arent the players you should be looking at.

PHB

I think ROutledge is a good player. City signing Benjami is just utterly stupid, he's 29, his game is based on pace, and hes costing way way way too much. If MON did that he'd be an idiot. City can do that cause they aren't running a business.

Raekwon

Archimedes wrote: »

Well I think if your aspirations are to challenge for a Uefa cup place with hopes of upping it a notch and challenging for fourth in the long run, then Benjani and Routledge arent the players you should be looking at.

I totally agree with you and that is why Villa fans are upset with MON not bringing enough players in from the last two tranfer windows. Our squad is just not big enough to challenge for Europe even though we've had 4 months to bring in players and MON know's this, tell's everybody at any given opportunity, then does nothing about it.

Routledge was signed last week on a short term contract (at least he can balance the side in midfield) and so I think that trying to sign Benjani on a similar contrat to Routledge we would be at least able to cover players that are injuried or suspended. We are now in a situation where two key players have picked up knocks (Abonglahor & Davies) and we don't really have decent cover for these players (unless you call Luke Moore & Zat Knight decent cover!)

Remeber Villa made a £3.75m profit in January's transfer market by selling Cahill to Bolton for £5m so spending the same amount on two players would make good business sense, even in the short term, and could boost us for the next few months.

Raekwon

PHB wrote: »

I think ROutledge is a good player. City signing Benjami is just utterly stupid, he's 29, his game is based on pace, and hes costing way way way too much. If MON did that he'd be an idiot. City can do that cause they aren't running a business.

Routledge has his future in his own hands. He didn't get a fair crack of the whip at Spurs but he looked decent at Palace. My only question about him is that if he has so much potential then why didn't Pompey or Fulham try and sign him after he was loaned to both clubs?

As for Benjami, he is 29 and cost £3.87m but he has proven that he can score goals this season with Pompey and I think he is a good short term gamble. As for players costing way to much, MON signed Marlon Harewood for £4m and then splashed out £4m on Zat Knight a few weeks later. They are both 28 year old Championship quality players that we paid well over the odds for, we would be very lucky if we could recoup a third of the money we spent on them both. Are you calling that good business???

PHB

I never trust other clubs judgments on players, I don't see why Portsmouth and Fulham not signing him means he is crap.

Benjami cost 3.87 million (+ add ons), but thats because City seriously ****ed over Portsmouth. That was not the deal Portsmouth initially agreed to, and if anyone had offered them that initially, they would have been laughed out of the store.

Lol, you'll never be happy. You sign Knight and Harewood for 4 million each. Adding depth to the squad. But they aren't good enough? Yet you're still suggesting you should sign more players like this in the windows.

Doodee

some fans are just never happy.

Villain

PHB wrote: »

Lol, you'll never be happy. You sign Knight and Harewood for 4 million each. Adding depth to the squad. But they aren't good enough? Yet you're still suggesting you should sign more players like this in the windows.

Your point is valid PHB, however the thing is the reason people were giving out about Harewood signing was we were told by our now former chief executive Richard FitzGerald that we would see top class signings and well Harewood is not top class. Also while a stiker is needed what is needed is a top class striker who can get us 15 to 20 league goals a season we have cover up front. The main issue with MON's lack of signings is we don't have a proper right back at the club, now most premier league teams have 2 we have none and until Routledge signed we didn't have a right sided midfielder.

Saying the fans want signings and then aren't happy when we sign people doesn't really understand the problem or what fans want, we want some top class signings that will improve the first 11 but we also want some cover for positions that we are really short on like the right side an also left back, if Bouma's injured our best Center Midfielder (Barry) has to move to left back, we aren't stupid we realise we can't demand signings and then slag them off if we don't agree on their quality however we can complain that our manager has spoken over and over about the small squad and then only sign one player while selling one.

I do expect a huge influx of players in the summer however we will also lose some players so we really need a lot players to get a decent squad going that can deal with the amount of games in the season, I mean if god forbid we had gone on a decent cup run we could end up with having to field youth players if we got injuries and suspensions. The only good thing is the money we'r saving on wages and the profit we have made on Cahill should mean the books will look good and thus Randy will be able to really splash the cash in the summer, I reckon we need to spend 50 to 60 million in the summer!!!

Helix

PHB wrote: »

Buying crap players now just to add depth results in you not having anywhere near as much more or wages to buy good players.
It is a direct choice between quanity or quality, and I'll always choose quality.

January is nuts. The transfer prices in England are currently nuts. Wasted money would all it would be.

itd only be wasted money if it was spent on rubbish, its up the manager to utilise his scouting network, and buy quality

we dont appear to have anything in the way of a plan b, either off the pitch or on it

PHB

I'm not saying that it's not a bad situation to buy in. Infact I know that MON does think its a bad situation to be in.

You are living in a dream world to an extent. You don't have a suger daddy. You have a guy who is trying to make a profit. Yes the CL is the goldmine, but not at the cost of rabid spending for no reason. He will make smart moves, try to get Villa into a safe UEFA cup spot each year.

As such, you really can't have both. You have a very small squad, that's the way it is. But you can't buy both top class players and depth at the same time. It seems to me MON is doing his best to get a balance between that. He's buying Youngs when they are availible, and if they aren't, he is buying Harewood and Knight to add depth. He obviously is on a restricted budget, that much is clear, but he is making the choice that instead of buying another set of Harewoods and Knights, he is going to wait until the summer and try buy a Barnes instead, and thats a policy I can get on board with.

Villain

PHB wrote: »

I'm not saying that it's not a bad situation to buy in. Infact I know that MON does think its a bad situation to be in.

You are living in a dream world to an extent. You don't have a suger daddy. You have a guy who is trying to make a profit. Yes the CL is the goldmine, but not at the cost of rabid spending for no reason. He will make smart moves, try to get Villa into a safe UEFA cup spot each year.

As such, you really can't have both. You have a very small squad, that's the way it is. But you can't buy both top class players and depth at the same time. It seems to me MON is doing his best to get a balance between that. He's buying Youngs when they are availible, and if they aren't, he is buying Harewood and Knight to add depth. He obviously is on a restricted budget, that much is clear, but he is making the choice that instead of buying another set of Harewoods and Knights, he is going to wait until the summer and try buy a Barnes instead, and thats a policy I can get on board with.

WOW WOW PHB can you please try provide evidence to back up your cliams that Randy is trying to make a profit and MON is on a restricted budget because I have only ever heard the opposite

PHB

I don't have any statements or anything, but he is ultimately a business man. He isn't going to have a suger daddy mentality like City or Chelsea. He isn't going to invest figures like 50-60 million. He's spend what is reported as a net spend of about 30 million so far if I'm not mistaken (which I may well be) which is a considerable amount for a club like Villa, but not excessive considering the new TV deal. He is investing no doubt, but not stupidly. MON is working with this, and looking to spend quality rather than quantity which is great.

Mr Alan

Ah hold on Villian, there isnt a owner of ANY football club, whos view isnt to making a profit, with the possible exception of RA, who even he has said he wants Chelsea to be profitable in the next few years.

Edit: City are somewhat different as their is a lot of political motives for Shinawatras involvment.

you're living in a dreamworld if ya think Randy Lerner doesnt want to make money from Villa.

Villain

I'm not saying he doesn't want to make money but I don't think he is like Doug in that he won't go into debt to get make signing and possibly make money, I have followed the club in great detail since Randy took often having question answered by the General Krulak himslef online and I don't think anyone who knows the setup at Villa would say that Martin O'Neill is being held back by a tight budget, the money is there for MON to spend and while Randy isn't going to throw money at players like Chelsea have he is also not going to limit spending on players to turn a profit.

I think other fans who don't know the club and the new owners setup are talking nonsense about budgets etc.

Helix

PHB wrote: »

I don't have any statements or anything, but he is ultimately a business man. He isn't going to have a suger daddy mentality like City or Chelsea. He isn't going to invest figures like 50-60 million. He's spend what is reported as a net spend of about 30 million so far if I'm not mistaken (which I may well be) which is a considerable amount for a club like Villa, but not excessive considering the new TV deal. He is investing no doubt, but not stupidly. MON is working with this, and looking to spend quality rather than quantity which is great.

im pretty sure lerner has come out several times and said that villa are not a money maker and he has no intention to ever run it like one

Mr Alan

So Villa are a Charity now?

Helix, if Lerner ever said he doesnt want to make money from Villa, he is lying. And i like him and dont think he is a liar, so i would be shocked if he actually said that.

I didnt say that Villa are being restricted by a budget, i merely responded to Villian taking offence to PHB saying Lerner will want to make money from Villa.

Savman

PHB wrote: »

You are living in a dream world to an extent. You don't have a suger daddy. You have a guy who is trying to make a profit.

PHB wrote:

I don't have any statements or anything, but he is ultimately a business man.

I was listening to all your points til you came out with this. I don't know exactly what sugar daddy criteria is, but I can assure you Randy Lerner ticks all the boxes. I suggest you do a little bit of research on the man, he certainly has the funds to match any of the other owners, if the money isn't being spent on transfers then it's "ultimately" MON who decides.

I think you'll find that not a single Villa fan is questioning RL's integrity, in fact he is pretty much our damn saviour. So IMHO bringing him into a discussion about MON in the transfer market is misguided. Maybe he chose O'Neill because of his thrifty purchases but that would go completely at odds with everything Lerner has done so far.

He has splashed the cash on everything from refurbishment work to ground signage and every little thing between. There are also plans for redevelopment of the North Stand in the very near future so frankly I refuse to believe he isn't sanctioning the fund to spend on the most important aspect of the rebuilding which is the feckin' team on the pitch.

We're not in crisis or anything, just frustrated.

Helix

Mr Alan wrote: »

So Villa are a Charity now?

Helix, if Lerner ever said he doesnt want to make money from Villa, he is lying. And i like him and dont think he is a liar, so i would be shocked if he actually said that.

I didnt say that Villa are being restricted by a budget, i merely responded to Villian taking offence to PHB saying Lerner will want to make money from Villa.

sure this is the man who recently threw a £5m charitable donation to a gallery in england, and gives tens of millions a year to supporting american troops abroad

he has no need for more money, mbna provides him with more than enough in that regard

he doesnt run the browns looking for profit, and hes said he wont run villa looking for one. iirc his first statement after taking over villa said that he was well aware of the friviloty of trying to run a sporting team as a business and trying to make money off them, and he was in it for success on the pitch, not in his bank account

what he HAS done in a business sense is set up some fantastic new initiatives and brought in some clever minds to make villa as self sufficient as possible, but hes certainly not afraid to spend his own money (all our signings have been from his own money and not the clubs)

Savman

Mr Alan wrote: »

So Villa are a Charity now?

Helix, if Lerner ever said he doesnt want to make money from Villa, he is lying. And i like him and dont think he is a liar, so i would be shocked if he actually said that.

I didnt say that Villa are being restricted by a budget, i merely responded to Villian taking offence to PHB saying Lerner will want to make money from Villa.

You're just stating the obvious, but if you knew more about it you'd know there's a difference between short term and long term investors and Lerner is the latter. It'll probably be 5-10yrs before he starts pulling real profit from the club so at this point in time the excuse "oh he's just out to make money like everyone else" is simply bolloxology. He has quite clearly put digged deep into his bottomless pockets on every level so far, there is nothing to suggest his business plans are somehow hampering MON in the transfer market and quite frankly I'm offended at the mere thought of it.

I make no apologies that our owner has far more class than some of his countrymen.:eek:

PHB

I'm not suggesting he's out to make a massive profit, but he's also not planning on making a loss either. Even if at absolute best is he planning on breaking even, he is still gona be putting constraints on how much O'Neill can spend. MON has obviously been told how much he can spend, and is acting accordingly. What other possible explanation is there? Do you think MON doesn't want more players?

Mr Alan

Helix wrote: »

sure this is the man who recently threw a £5m charitable donation to a gallery in england, and gives tens of millions a year to supporting american troops abroad

So Villa ARE a Charity?

Helix wrote: »

he has no need for more money, mbna provides him with more than enough in that regard)

then why does he continue to work if he needs no more money? people always need more money. even if only to upgrade the quality of products they invest in etc etc.

Helix wrote: »

hes said he wont run villa looking for one. iirc his first statement after taking over villa said that he was well aware of the friviloty of trying to run a sporting team as a business and trying to make money off them, and he was in it for success on the pitch, not in his bank account

Still waiting to see this statement where he said he has no intention of making money from Villa.....

Savman wrote: »

You're just stating the obvious.

I would have thought so, but when i said it, people corrected me claiming that Lerner has no intention of making any money from Villa

Savman wrote: »

there's a difference between short term and long term investors and Lerner is the latter. It'll probably be 5-10yrs before he starts pulling real profit from the club so at this point in time the excuse "oh he's just out to make money like everyone else" is simply bolloxology.

Agree 100%. but you are saying its an investment....but taking offence to me saying he wants to make money from it? Are they not the same thing?

I agree it looks like he is content with it to be a long term investment, but an ivestment is an investment. People in here seem to be of the opinion that Lerner has no intention of ever making money with Villa, that Villa is his new Charity or play-thing.

Savman wrote: »

there is nothing to suggest his business plans are somehow hampering MON in the transfer market and quite frankly I'm offended at the mere thought of it.

At no point did i suggest they were hampering O'Neills transfer activity.

Savman wrote: »

I make no apologies that our owner has far more class than some of his countrymen.:eek:

Cheap shot-but true none the less.

Helix

villa are his football club, which is seperate to his businesses

same as the browns are

im looking for a quote

Savman

PHB wrote: »

I'm not suggesting he's out to make a massive profit, but he's also not planning on making a loss either. Even if at absolute best is he planning on breaking even, he is still gona be putting constraints on how much O'Neill can spend. MON has obviously been told how much he can spend, and is acting accordingly. What other possible explanation is there? Do you think MON doesn't want more players?

Man you're so wide of the mark on this you really are. There is no evidence of any kind of "transfer limit" imposed by Lerner, he simply goes by who O'Neill tells him he wants and what O'Neill thinks is a fair valuation. The club have made it very clear that MON holds all the cards relating to transfers and that nobody interferes with his dealings. If we don't sign a given player, chances are it's because MON didn't think he was worth x amount of money or else didn't like the player's attitude or demands or whatever. There is not a chance in hell that Lerner is stopping anything from happening, in fact the opposite is true, he's been the catalyst in our mini revival.

Now you can go on about this imaginary tight transfer budget but you're really wasting your time, the issue here is Mr. O'Neill and his inactivity in the market with substantial funds at his disposal.

Case study for Randy Lerner-backed purchases:
Petrov £6.5m (ouch!)
Maloney £1m
Carew £0m (swap deal with Baros, yay)
Young £9.65m
Reo-Coker £8.5m
Knight £4m
Harewood £4m
Davies £8m (pending)
Carson £8m (really pending)
Routledge £1.25m
Salifou £750,000 (Sali-who I hear u say)

That's a cool £52m. Some might say almost worthy of the sugar daddy title

Savman

Mr Alan wrote: »

Cheap shot-but true none the less.

Sorry!

PHB

MON constantly talks about the need to strengthen. He apparently has massive funds at his disposal. Yet he chooses not to use them?
Why? Because he thinks they aren't worth it in terms of wages or fees, or he can't attract them.

If money isn't an issue, then the first thing wouldn't be an issue. Maybe its the second thing, but I doubt that.
The logical explanation is that there are real limits on MON's spending, and he wants to use them as best he can.

Mr Alan

So O'Neill has zero limitations in the transfer market Savman?

can we expect to see Ronaldinho? Drogba? Berbatov? Benzema? Huntelaar? Alonso? Alves?

Dont be ridiculous, of course there is some limitations on the amount of money available to MON, there is for EVERYONE, incl Chelsea and Utd. Villa are no different.

Raekwon

PHB wrote: »

I never trust other clubs judgments on players, I don't see why Portsmouth and Fulham not signing him means he is crap.

Benjami cost 3.87 million (+ add ons), but thats because City seriously ****ed over Portsmouth. That was not the deal Portsmouth initially agreed to, and if anyone had offered them that initially, they would have been laughed out of the store.

Lol, you'll never be happy. You sign Knight and Harewood for 4 million each. Adding depth to the squad. But they aren't good enough? Yet you're still suggesting you should sign more players like this in the windows.

Firstly, when did I ever say that Wayne Routledge was crap? He has potential, there is no doubt about that, I only questioned how much real potential does he actually have if teams like Portsmouth and Fulham pass up opportunities to sign him?

And what do you mean I'll never be happy? We signed 2 over priced players last summer (5 in total, 2 on loan) that were no better then the players that we let leave (11 in total). The squad was left lighter in numbers then the previous season and we have no rightback at all. Would you be happy with that? Also do you actually think that selling a 22 year old England under 21 regular for £2.5m then signing a 28 year old walking liability for £4m is progress? I think I'll have some of what you're drinking :rolleyes:

Okay, I'll break it down into baby steps because you Man U supporters never seem to be able to think logically.

In November 2006 Villa had a some injury problems and our form when from good to awful. MON came out and said that our squad was really small and that his main objective was to strengthen it during the January transfer window. He did, he got in John Carew, Ashley Young, Shaun Maloney & Phil Bardsley at rightback on loan from yourselves. Everybody was happy.

Fast-forward to the summer of 2007. Our ex-CEO tells the fans that Randy Lerner has released significant funds to strengthen the team and we can expect some top quality signings during the summer. 5 players in (2 on loan) and 11 players leave. The fans are a little shocked. MON comes out and says that his main targets (rumoured to be SWP, Defoe, Hoyte & Bosingwa) were not available but he will try and get them in January.

January comes and MON surprising tells SSN that he hopes to hold onto the players that he has he then sells Gary Cahill to Bolton for £5m then signs Wayne Routledge for £1.25m. The CEO quits. Again MON says that he struggled to find players that he wanted and he hopes that we don't pick up too many injuries. A few weeks later Fulham beat us 2-1 and Agbonlahor & Davies both pick up knocks and we don't have decent cover for either player.

Are you starting to get it now?

Raekwon

Doodee wrote: »

some fans are just never happy.

Care to expand on that statment?

PHB

Can you give me any reason whatsoever why MON wouldn't want to buy players if money isn't an issue.

Bounty Hunter

I agree with 90% of what the non-villa fans have said and think I have only posted once here since the Fulham game cos I knew it would change from beig v positive to extremley negative. Infact that once was just to comment on Routlege getting a game for the reserves to get his match fitness right in which he scored what was supposidly a very nice goal. Villa are progressing Very well under Randy learner, who is a business man but who is also willing to spend his money if he thinks/MON can convince him its a good investment.

MON is someone i trust to run my football club, he makes players better than they were previously through great man-management. He got rid of the dead-weight and although we now havw a small squad I ask which of are cast off's are have proved MON since leaving? Davis (many wanted to keep) wanted out, we got good money and now he is on loan in Scotland, Samuel and McCann I can remember seing since they left and have now been joined by Cahill fighting relegation.

Villa still have argeuably the easiest run in out of all the Euro-hopefulls and an extra euro place will still probably be opened up by a big 4 team winning the cups (unless Spurs win the CC). We havent had that injury crisis everyone is talking about, Gabby is outfor less than 2weeks and I think Petrov has pulled out of the Bulgaria squad. So prehaps just in the next game Gabby will be replaced by Harewood (who despite being more heart than quality) deserves a chace to start after his sub apperances and Routledge can come in on one wing while A.Young can return on the other, although Maloney is a viable replacement for either of these spots.

I think I can often be more positive than most Villa fans but i did say I only agreed with 90% as I also think that have too small a squad and with an injury or two may struggle to fill a bench. this is Villa's squad atm:

1. Sorensen 3. Bouma 4. Mellberg 5. Laursen 6. Barry 7. Young 8. Moore 9. Harewood 10. Carew 11. Agbonlahor 13. Taylor 14. Delfouneso 15. Davies 16. Knight 17. Salifou
18. Routledge 19. Petrov 20. Reo-Coker 22. Carson 23. Berger
26. Gardner 27. Osbourne 28. Maloney


thats 23 players inc 3GK's inc Sorenson who hasnt and wont play this season and Salifou, Berger, Delfouneso, Osbourne who IMO atleast are only Reserve team level atm (although we havent reallly seen Togo's Zizu but that in itself eans something). therefore 2/3 injuries and we cant make IMO a premiership standard bench & looking to the future and Villa in Europe hopefully, we will need more than the 3/4 suggested incoming players if we can compete like we have this season in the league again, as in a way we were lucky getting knocked out of the cups early as it limited our games this year.

and nobody is suggesting bringing in sub standard players just to fill the squad there is quality out there, for instance why not go after Giles Barnes in January instead of the Summer. Prices might be inflated but we did it with Young last year and after all Newcastle offered only £2m for him, it got turned down but most people would say thats a drastic undervaluing of the player. Or as many here have prob suggested why not bid for Defoe if he was available?

Bounty Hunter

Mr Alan wrote: »

So O'Neill has zero limitations in the transfer market Savman?

can we expect to see Ronaldinho? Drogba? Berbatov? Benzema? Huntelaar? Alonso? Alves?

Dont be ridiculous, of course there is some limitations on the amount of money available to MON, there is for EVERYONE, incl Chelsea and Utd. Villa are no different.

I think the situation as suggested by General Krulak (Randy lerners right hand man and direct link to the fans) is that MON is 100% in charge of transfers in and out and that if he can find a player he wants that can bring Villa to the next level he will be given the backing to do so. no blank cheque but full support in all his endevours. NO Drogbas but player tha would fit into the owners 5year progression plan i.e now players that could help us get into Europe but not be surpless to requirements in the future, hense all the good U-21 types.

Savman

Mr Alan wrote: »

So O'Neill has zero limitations in the transfer market Savman?

can we expect to see Ronaldinho? Drogba? Berbatov? Benzema? Huntelaar? Alonso? Alves?

Dont be ridiculous, of course there is some limitations on the amount of money available to MON, there is for EVERYONE, incl Chelsea and Utd. Villa are no different.

I know that sir, of course those players you mentioned are a level (or ten) above what we can realistically expect. Then again, Berbatov is at Spurs and Alves just went to Boro, hardly top european sides.

I accept we have limitations and while there are many I do not believe money is one of them, that is all.

Mr Alan

I meant Dani Alves

Savman

Mr Alan wrote: »

I meant Dani Alves

Fine but my point is still kinda relevant.

Raekwon

PHB wrote: »

Can you give me any reason whatsoever why MON wouldn't want to buy players if money isn't an issue.

Thats the million dollar question, only MON himself knows the answer to that.

Mr Alan

Money is a limitation for ALL clubs. including Aston Villa.

Villain

Randy Lerner... the right sort of American
By NEIL MOXLEY - More by this author »

Last updated at 08:18am on 21st January 2008

Comments (3)

The road from Ewood Park towards the M65 is littered with pubs. Last spring any one of them was full of travelling supporters enjoying a post-match pint, basking in the glory of victory.

Randy Lerner's car went past one. He wanted to stop, swap opinions on the Blackburn match and buy a round for the entire establishment to thank Aston Villa's fans for supporting his club.

It would have been the most costly pint of bitter even a billionaire like Randy Lerner had sampled. He was advised against the idea, on the basis that a quiet drink was the last thing he would have enjoyed.

As Liverpool's hapless owners from across the Pond prepare to bale out — unable or unwilling to understand the enormity of running a club in the Barclays Premier League — it is interesting to contrast them with one who has.

Almost 18 months after assuming control — £63.6million for a club of Villa's size now looks incredibly good business — it is difficult to criticise any of Lerner's major decisions.

Doug Ellis, watching his pennies before selling up, had scaled down plans for rebuilding the training ground. After Lerner consulted Martin O'Neill, they were revised.

Villa's players can now enjoy a swim in the hydrotherapy pool, use a huge range of fitness and rehabilitation equipment or enjoy a game of snooker.

The historic Holte pub at the corner of the Trinity Road and Witton Lane had lain disused for years. Boarded up and unloved, Lerner decided it was an integral part of Villa's history and spent £4m restoring it. He will never make a profit; it was a gesture to fans.

Last season, before the Sheffield United game, the European Cup-winning team of 1982 were paraded at Villa Park. He paid every player's expenses, plus £1,000 for turning up and and treated them and their wives to a weekend in a four-star hotel. He didn't need to do any of that. The atmosphere was incredible. Villa duly thumped the Blades.

Even 1981 Championship - winning boss Ron Saunders, who refused point-blank to set foot in Villa Park while Ellis was in charge, was cajoled back and took a lap of honour before last season's game with Manchester United.

"The fans worship the ground Randy walks on," said Dave Woodhall of fanzine Heroes and Villains.

"He can't do anything wrong. He's got the common touch. He and his staff have tapped into the fans' mentality. Free scarves, free coaches to Chelsea, refurbishing the Holte pub — and it seems like he genuinely cares."

O'Neill, who has been supported in the transfer market, says of Lerner: "I don't think his ambitions have changed, he has the club at heart. I've got to know him better now because he comes over for games. He'll be at Anfield and he's as enthusiastic now as he was when he took over. He has big plans.

"I realise that if I do well I can realise those ambitions. He doesn't want to put the club in any financial difficulty. He recognises that. He has the Cleveland Browns to run. He's trying to bring ideas over here he thinks are worthwhile.

"But Aston Villa is not a plaything for Randy Lerner, he's really genuine about this club. You can see that from the things going on.

"As far as I can see, he has absolutely no intention of selling the club to make a profit. What he has bought, he will improve. For example, he has big plans for the stadium. You may call his interest quaint but he wants to bring Villa up. He wants people to have better facilities.

"He's quite shy, but he has a really great sense of humour. He said he's an enthusiastic amateur when it comes to knowledge of the game. He knows the game well enough to have a full enjoyment of it. But I think it's better the chairman doesn't have too much knowledge. I'd prefer him just to stay with a basic knowledge, if you get my meaning."

After the recent match against Reading, Lerner was still swapping opinions outside Villa Park two hours after the final whistle. Claret and blue scarf wrapped round his neck, he greeted everyone with an enthusiastic: "Hey man, how are ya?" He later swapped a few pleasantries, jumped into his Land Rover and drove off down Trinity Road to the converted farmhouse he has bought.

So, an enigmatic Irish manager, pints of bitter, a Land Rover and a converted farmhouse. I give you Randy Lerner — a very English American

An article from the Daily Mail in the UK.

PHB I really think you shouldn't bother posting about another team if you knew so little about them, MON is not restricted by money not been available from Randy Lerner. MON has however said in the past he won't pay over the odds for players.

Randy Lerner even has a Villa tatoo!

Helix

Mr Alan wrote: »

So O'Neill has zero limitations in the transfer market Savman?

can we expect to see Ronaldinho? Drogba? Berbatov? Benzema? Huntelaar? Alonso? Alves?

they wouldnt sign for us tho so your point is moot. if we put in a 35m bid for drogba on june 1st, and chelsea accepted it, drogba would tell us where to go

Savman

Thanks Villain, this is quite relevant to current discussion:

"As far as I can see, he has absolutely no intention of selling the club to make a profit. What he has bought, he will improve. For example, he has big plans for the stadium. You may call his interest quaint but he wants to bring Villa up."

Bounty Hunter

I actually like the imput of the non-Villa fans gives a different perspective and is rare in this thread. Randy is the right type of Owner as suggested above although that article was directley related to the troubles with the American duo at Pool at the time. General Krulak is always having to repeat himself on this point also as MON seems to treat Randys money as his own (and rightfully so to an extent) and what he repeats is that their is no se limit that Randy will back MON as he believes in the mans judgement. The fact that MON doesent just throw around Randys money would also help hi trust O'Neil too

Savman

Mr Alan wrote: »

Money is a limitation for ALL clubs. including Aston Villa.

I can see this whole notion is getting lost in translation, we're not asking for £50m signings that will bankrupt the damn club. Even £25m would be irresponsible spending for us, if you think that's what this is about then you really haven't been paying attention. We need a recognised RB, as MON himself has stated, I don't care if he only pays £3m for said RB if he's good enough to do the job. Routledge is a great signing for our imbalanced right side at peanuts too, so well done MON on that one. We're not saying we want Drogba-esque but just more of the same to keep us up there or thereabouts.

The expectations at Villa re much different than those at Anfield or Old Trafford, I don't think you're getting this. European qualification is our immediate goal, then we can hope for higher quality signings like those you mentioned. I could argue Berbatov only chose Spurs cos they were a CL-chasing team at the time, so while we don't have that draw yet we aren't far off. If you'd been following the thread you'd know I staunchly defended MON on his transfer policy over the last year and a half but this January was so extremely underwhelming even I could not see the sense in it. He either knows exactly what he's at and we're all panicking needlessly or else this will have been an opportunity missed, we wont know the outcome til May.

I can tell you one thing for certain, regardless what happens between now and then, this summer MON will be under pressure he hasn't yet experienced at VP yet to bring in some decent players. It's all been nice n rosey for him, so if things don't go to plan he can expect the wrath of the fans in the same way all of his predecessors did. The man is not immune to criticism.

Savman

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

I actually like the imput of the non-Villa fans gives a different perspective and is rare in this thread.

Nobody objecting to outside opinion, but we can disagree

Raekwon

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

nobody is suggesting bringing in sub standard players just to fill the squad there is quality out there, for instance why not go after Giles Barnes in January instead of the Summer. Prices might be inflated but we did it with Young last year and after all Newcastle offered only £2m for him, it got turned down but most people would say thats a drastic undervaluing of the player. Or as many here have prob suggested why not bid for Defoe if he was available?

I think this is what frustrates Villa fans the most. MON seems to want young hungry English players and the likes of Jermain Defoe, Giles Barnes & Justin Hoyte tick all the right boxes but it seems like MON has no interest in them (well he has nothing to state otherwise). And that is the real bottom line here, MON simpley hasn't really gone after the types of players that we need this January when everybody though that he would. That is why most Villa fans are puzzled at this moment in time.

Another example was last summer when 3 rightbacks left the club (Aaron Hughes, Mark Delaney & Phil Bardsley) but MON never got in any replacements in that area even though a couple of young English rightbacks were available for very good prices (Fulham's Liam Rosenior £2.5m & Chelsea's Glen Johnson £3m). Alas these players went to both Reading & Portsmouth respectively leaving MON chasing a losing battle trying to sign (rumoured anyway) Jose Bosingwa (who's fee went from £9m to £22m!?!) and Justyn Hoyte (who is still not for sale).

Villain

Bounty I welcome the input of fans of other teams hwoever if they don't know what their talking about and post sweeping statments that any fan that follows the club know are crap it just makes their posts look ignorant

Raekwon

Savman wrote: »

Nobody objecting to outside opinion, but we can disagree

Touché

Bounty Hunter

Villain wrote: »

Bounty I welcome the input of fans of other teams hwoever if they don't know what their talking about and post sweeping statments that any fan that follows the club know are crap it just makes their posts look ignorant

true but we'll put them right and unlike prehaps the Liverpool thread we shouldent make it us vs them, although that is obvious more a Man utd thing. but people like PHB i think get unfair stick coming onto some of these threads just cos he is a united fan and i actually think that he, and others bring good points that need to be said about Villa. This is because He can be positive about Villa and makes points that we prehaps all know but arent saying because we lost on the weekend. even though we arent happy at the mo its nice to hear things are good.

Savman

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

true but we'll put them right and unlike prehaps the Liverpool thread we shouldent make it us vs them, although that is obvious more a Man utd thing. but people like PHB i think get unfair stick coming onto some of these threads just cos he is a united fan and i actually think that he, and others bring good points that need to be said about Villa. This is because He can be positive about Villa and makes points that we prehaps all know but arent saying because we lost on the weekend. even though we arent happy at the mo its nice to hear things are good.

It's not an Us V Them thing, I just think PHB is poorly educated on things at VP because he dragged RL into the equation which has nothing to do with anything. I'm not 'giving him stick', just trying to nip this in the bud before a non-Villa fan allows themselves to think, for one second, that RL hasn't saved AVFC. I refuse to let anyone lump the man into the same category as other club owners who are seemingly trying to use their clubs as a toy (not a cheapshot Mr Alan btw).

The fact is that Lerner has not put the club into huge debt, he's financed pretty much everything himself and not ONCE so far has he shown ANY indication that this is a "plaything". The mere suggestion is complete bollocks. There was a poll on VillaTalk a while back about Lerner, I think it was something like 99% saying he was the bees knees (the 1% was some idiot who clicked the wrong button by mistake).

So unless PHB, or any non-Villa fan knows something we don't about Randy Lerner, there's nothing to discuss tbh.

Bounty Hunter

in my first post I said I liked the non-Villa fans imput that was all, we have educated them on how great Randy lerner seems to be lets leave it at that as it seems weve scared the non villa fans away anyway plus no I wasnt suggesting you were "giving him stick" hense my mentioning the Liverpool thread were he often gets abuse for having differing opinions to Pool fans... b'cos he supports United and isnt always going to agree with them.

anyway looking forward newcastle is on the horizon and a good chance to get back moving in the right direction after the hiccup that was Fulham (hopefullY). Young and Routlege might both play in this game and it will be interesting to see Villa with a balanced midfield/attack, infact these two could swap wings as both can play either side if needed.

Savman

Have heard good reports about this Delfouneso lad, just signed pro contract at 17yo and already training with the first team & travelled down to Fulham.

I have to say, our youth system seems to be up there with the best.

Mr Alan

Sorry to burst your bubble boys but PHBs welcome in the Liverpool thread is about wat it was in here when he didnt agree with you all.

Its not a "club" thing. Its more to do with him having views that most of you dont agree with, thats the same reason he occassionally get hassle in the Liverpool thread, and i occassionally get it in the Utd thread....although tbh, its getting better.

Villain

Yea Nathan seems to be very much regarded as one of our best youth players, I think he got a hat trick for the England u17's in his first game with them.