so they had better players but lost them

all Lambert's money could go to improving the team - other teams had to spend theirs just to replace the quality people they had sold.

Doesn't make it any easier for those teams to be improved (rather than left the same).

Of course not all of those teams have improved so the comparison isn't that relevant. They are better than Villa now because they were better before.

The problem with Lambert isn't just that he didn't improve them (lots of teams don't improve) but the sheer negative soul-destroying nature of the football being played, that gave no remote prospect of improvement

Posted By: mr carra, Feb 16, 14:23:07