Kritiken mot Ellis, en förklaring.
Meningarna är många. Här kommer en genomtänkt sådan.
På en fråga om Ellis försiktighet att spendera pengar för att inte hamna i ekonomiska svårigheter som så många andra klubbar har hamnat i, så hade Pete Bland ett mycket välskrivet svar som vi publicerar här.
---------------------
If you look at it in simple terms, then each year only perhaps 4 clubs (now - it used to be 3) can take the Telly Money league places and the oodles of cash that go with that. So if more than 4 try to get there by spending what they haven't got, then the extra clubs will put themselves in at least short term financial trouble.
Leeds took the risk, Newcastle took the risk, Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Man utd did too.
Villa decided not to take the risk.
6 clubs (now just 5) are competing for 4 places. It's a closed shop, basically. Arsenal and Man Utd have succeeded every year, and are therefore loaded (excluding Arsenal's 350 million quid for a new ground) Newcastle have mostly succeeded of late, and are able to manage the debt they accrued building a huge ground (which they fill) Chelsea with the help of Mathew harding just about kept the wolf from the door, but were in serious trouble because of a combination of Ken Bates ground/hotel/boxes dream and high wages, but their elevated status at least meant that Abramovic wanted to buy them as a toy. And Leeds f*cked up big style, with bonkers wages and poor signings, which they might have got way with for a bit longer if it wasn't for failure to qualify for the Champs league, and then the collapse of the transfer market.
Villa didn't ever want to take the risk. The Ellis approach has been based around little by little - one stand at a time, on the cheap, one player at a time, on the cheap. Only spend when you are forced to, don't spend what you haven't got. In many ways this seems prudent, sensible etc.
Except, there's a big flaw in his crack.
Because of his personal shortcomings - massive ego, need to feel in control of everything, he has not enabled people in the club to do the best job they can, to allow the most to be made of what is available - The raising revenue, the marketing, the image, the Doug Ellis this, the Doug Ellis that (Stands, exec boxes, suites etc).
He won't appoint the best people (they would show him up and disagree with him) he won't keep his fingers out of others jobs, he won't stop interfering - all this leads to under performance, and disillusionment. Basically less finance available to spend on doing the best we can (without going bust). And money spent badly - the Witton lane stand had to be re-done, ultimately costing money it shouldn't. The Trinity stand went wrong, poor contractor selection cost money it shouldn't. Collymore and Ginola, both signed by Ellis/heavily influenced by Ellis' ego.
Some aimed for the stars and got there, some fell back to earth with a crash we just sat at home, not daring to try and too stubborn and self centred to build ourselves a club which could afford to set off without having to risk everything.
Ellis' failing isn't "not spending on players" (what we haven't got) it's not appointing the right people and letting them get on with making the most of the opportunities to grow the club in the premier league years. it's misplaced penny pinching leading to overspending on stands, it's spending on stands that are there for his ego, not because the club needed them (certainly not in the form they are in), it's in his suppressing the rich heritage of the club in favour of his own image. It's in ignoring sound advice from people who know better than he does. - "talking big while acting small" and "He thinks this training ground is the best in the country. We've got our own chef now, and he [Ellis] will say to me, 'I wonder what those people at Leicester City are having today, John? Probably beans on toast'. When this [training ground] was built, in 1975, it was super-duper, but in 25 years everybody else has caught up or gone past us, and this is like a shanty town now, compared to some."
Ellis isn't the worst chairman in the world, by a long way, but he's second rate, or third rate, and Villa are worse off for him coming back in 83. 21 years later and he's still clinging on, but he's less capable now and little wiser in a harsher world and a more competitive one, with bigger prizes for winning and penalties for failing.
Over that time, it's unarguable that he has failed on every level. Trophies, Financial results, share price, opportunities not so much missed as willfully ignored. The club subverted for the Ego of Ellis.
Pete Bland
