Jump to content
IGNORED

This club has no business in the Championship


dREDful

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Andy082005 said:

As someone who was over the moon with Pearson being appointed ….I’ll be one of the first to admit he has to go . 
 

Almost a year in charge and where as I appreciate things take time, we should be seeing some progress by now . Absolutely nothing has changed .

Simply not good enough 

This isn't really true IMO. Fans simply forget how bad we were last season.

Last season we were, statistically, the worst team in the league. Ignore big shiny stadiums, attendances, wage bills, transfer fees, size of clubs etc for a moment. The actual on field side that Pearson inherited was performing at lower standard than all 3 relegated teams - financially crippled Sheffield Wednesday, perennial Championship relegation fodder Rotherham, and resource-less Championship newbies Wycombe. 

Imagine we were neutrals looking on at Pearson inheriting that Wycombe side for a Championship season - what would our expectations have been for him/them? Of course we have much better resources than a club like Wycombe, but from a purely footballing performance based perspective it's a reasonable comparison. 

Statistically, we're no longer the worst team in the league, we're about the 7th worst team in the league (depending on your source of data). Personally, I also think we look a little bit better than last season - that small improvement is visible to the eye IMO. We've also cut the wage bill in making that change.

This is technically progress and improvement. I appreciate that it's relatively slow, frustrating progress. I also appreciate it's depressing that being the 7th worst in the league constitutes progress for us, but that's where we are. 

 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

This isn't really true IMO. Fans simply forget how bad we were last season.

Last season we were, statistically, the worst team in the league. Ignore big shiny stadiums, attendances, wage bills, transfer fees, size of clubs etc for a moment. The actual on field side that Pearson inherited was performing at lower standard than all 3 relegated teams - financially crippled Sheffield Wednesday, perennial Championship relegation fodder Rotherham, and resource-less Championship newbies Wycombe. 

Imagine we were neutrals looking on at Pearson inheriting that Wycombe side for a Championship season - what would our expectations have been for him/them? Of course we have much better resources than a club like Wycombe, but from a purely footballing performance based perspective it's a reasonable comparison. 

Statistically, we're no longer the worst team in the league, we're about the 7th worst team in the league (depending on your source of data). Personally, I also think we look a little bit better than last season - that small improvement is visible to the eye IMO. We've also cut the wage bill in making that change.

This is technically progress and improvement. I appreciate that it's relatively slow, frustrating progress. I also appreciate it's depressing that being the 7th worst in the league constitutes progress for us, but that's where we are. 

 

quite interesting that! I guess an accurate measure of pearsons performance is to list the championship in terms of wage bill,,, a club 10th on the list for example ought to be performing roughly at that level. I suppose it can then vary depending on possession stats, fan satisfaction etc, but by most metrics, we are generally performing poorly i would guess, perhaps apart from minutes played by young players?!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Simon bristol said:

quite interesting that! I guess an accurate measure of pearsons performance is to list the championship in terms of wage bill,,, a club 10th on the list for example ought to be performing roughly at that level. I suppose it can then vary depending on possession stats, fan satisfaction etc, but by most metrics, we are generally performing poorly i would guess, perhaps apart from minutes played by young players?!

It's a bit of a tough one to judge NP with the wage bill. We've certainly overpaid relative to the team's output, and that's the fault of Pearon's predecessors, not Pearson. Kasey Palmer is an obvious example - he's likely on around 15-20k pw, but how much of an "asset" is he to Pearson in practice? It actually gets worse, because every pound tied up in paying a player like Palmer is a pound that NP is unable to spend elsewhere.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Simon bristol said:

quite interesting that! I guess an accurate measure of pearsons performance is to list the championship in terms of wage bill,,, a club 10th on the list for example ought to be performing roughly at that level. I suppose it can then vary depending on possession stats, fan satisfaction etc, but by most metrics, we are generally performing poorly i would guess, perhaps apart from minutes played by young players?!

Good point.

2 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

It's a bit of a tough one to judge NP with the wage bill. We've certainly overpaid relative to the team's output, and that's the fault of Pearon's predecessors, not Pearson. Kasey Palmer is an obvious example - he's likely on around 15-20k pw, but how much of an "asset" is he to Pearson in practice? It actually gets worse, because every pound tied up in paying a player like Palmer is a pound that NP is unable to spend elsewhere.

 

Good response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I know neither you or I pick the team, but what would you have done in your pre-game set up / decision making differently to what Nige did, bearing in mind we’d just come off a 4 point / 2 game “run”?

Good post.

I said way back in August that if posters wants to react to an individual game, there are gonna be a lot of negative posts this season.

In our match day 18 today there was one senior player not selected who was available….Palmer.

Certainly it’s possible to be critical of Nige and say his “trimmer squad” plan has backfired.  Or ask yourself, is he just saying that to cover up the lack of money available, and actually it’s kinda forced on him….he actually can’t afford a bigger squad.

"Certainly it’s possible to be critical of Nige and say his “trimmer squad” plan has backfired.  Or ask yourself, is he just saying that to cover up the lack of money available, and actually it’s kinda forced on him….he actually can’t afford a bigger squad."

Stretching it a bit there Mate, he has signed 7 players.

One thing for sure. what ever the reason(s) our current manager and coaching set up are not getting the best out of the players we have. Improved since he came back from his last illness granted but overall very underwhelming and worrying.

Saturday is a massive game regarding where this is heading IMO. Regardless of the result if the performance falls back to those of a month ago then we are into something has to be done territory.

Derby are a decent team and we will have to be at the Blackburn game standards both on the pitch and in the dug out to gain any points. I am hopeful we will be and yesterday was a blip on an otherwise upwards trajectory .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the club has shaved around a third off the wage bill from last year. A lot of that huge wage bill was the player's coming to the end of their contracts. It's still sometimes the case that players get "loyalty" bonuses for seeing out a contract, plus the last year's wage is normally at a higher level.

So let's suppose we are operating at around the £25m mark at present (as opposed to the £35m of last season). I have no idea whether that is a level at which we can operate within the constraints of FFP, as none of us has any idea of the income streams at the club at the moment. It may be the level we can work out, we may have to drop it even more; time will tell.

The squad is of course unbalanced, with a number of what I would call "legacy" players, ie players on contracts that we entered into in better times; and can't really afford anymore. At the top end will be players like Kalas, Palmer, Wells & JD. Then the next bracket Bentley, COD, Weimann (until renegotiated), Martin. The first four I would estimate are collectively I would say on around £5m per year. That's 20% of your total playing budget, and of those 4, only Kalas is now what i would call in the starting 11.

Bentley, COD, Martin are more productive in terms of their minutes/goals/games, but maybe an expensive luxury that the club will need to make a decision on next summer.

I've no doubt that in a perfect world we would look to trade Palmer, Wells & JD; and re-sign Kalas, Bentley, Martin; not sure about COD just yet, to new contracts. 

The reality, as shown by the Nagy transfer is that the market is dead for those sort of players, and with two years left on their contracts we are either stuck with them, or heavily subsidising loans elsewhere. We are already short on numbers (NP wanting a smaller squad + injuries). Can we afford to lose further players, when financially it takes us no further forward. For instance, you loan out Palmer, we would be paying 75% of his wages I reckon at least. For him to be playing for someone else. That only makes sense if we are able to get someone else in for that remaining 25% of his contract (a tall order at best) who would take us forward as a club.

Then we come to players like Kalas, Bentley, Martin, Massengo, COD. All entering their final years (if we take up the option on COD). I can't believe Kalas, and Bentley will take a pay drop at their stage of their careers. Likewise Massengo, and Martin will get offers from the new riches of L1. 

So even the players that you want to keep, you probably can't; and the ones you don't (on good contracts) are probably impossible to get rid of; without some form of payoff (Nagy).

In the meantime. The club is trying to formulate what budgets they have moving forward. Who knows what we lost last season due to Covid, and that of course affects your playing budget moving forwards. The crowds haven't been too bad this season, but that won't continue of course; and a large number probably won't renew.

It's all a bit of a perfect storm financially for the new unfortunately. Made of course, by the Senior Leadership Team (All culpable) trying to make the club self sustainable through some form of Ponzi financial scheme of buy low, train, sell high. With no thought given to continuity of the squad moving forward. I believe the only exception to this was when LJ insisted that if he couldn't have Webster, then he wouldn't sell Flint.

Sometimes the players know more about what's happening than we give them credit for. Bryan, Reid, Webster, Kodjia, Elliason, Brownhill; all wanted to go. Flint had it written into his new contract (as did Brownhill of course). Got a decent fee for Pack, and Kelly. You can't stop these players going if they're ambitious, it just shows that they felt that if they stayed at the club, then they wouldn't be able to attain those ambitions. That for me is the greatest shame of the last 3/4 years. It feels like we've lost a bit of a golden generation of players.

MA was obviously tasked with making the club self sustainable; and felt that his wheeler dealer approach was the best way for that to happen. What is noticable is of course, that this all didn't happen over one or two transfer windows. It was allowed to happen over the course of 3-4 years. Even the Kelly money was brought forward one season, so we could have the magical "first profit in 20 years" headline. It was in fact just stealing from Peter to pay Paul.

The Lansdowns had become fixated on infrastructure (AG & Failand). That of course needed doing 10-15 years ago (The new stadium debacle took far too long). If it had been done then. Then maybe the income generated would have put us on a firmer footing financially then to push forward. Now we are left with improved facilities, and a much poorer squad of players, that as I mentioned above; are almost impossible to change until the summer of 2023.

At the moment, we probably have a L1 squad, trying to stay in the Championship, but hindered by a still large immobile wage bill. When NP said it would take 3 years, he knew already that by that date (2023), their would be more flexibility financially to craft a team.

As NP said after the Sheffield game "We know where we are as a team". Yes, we are poor; but with a few loans/new bodies in Jan (Thank god for a transfer window); I'm still hopeful that we can be better than at least 3 teams over the course of 46 games.

It's hard going at the moment. But periods of play like the first half against Blackburn recently, show me that there is hope. We just have to keep going, unlike last season, where certain players just gave up,

  • Like 5
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to keep it up. To fight for the badge and with ugly or nice style..that doesn't matter when it is a crisis like this.

I assume we won't get relegated but not very safe also. The staff had to get players that can make us better and get rid of the likes of Wells, Semenyo and the two midfielders that signed this season. I mean the two from the former Leicester team.

It will take some time to be competitive but think about it. Barsnely hit the top 6 with their poor team...so if the key players are good and the morale is high we can do some great things with time.

Peace from Bucharest !

 

 

PLEASE A MOD CAN LET ONLY THIS MESSAGE UP ? MY PHONE WENT CRAZY AND I SPAMMED BY MISTAKE. 

 

Thanks !

 

Edited by Mihai
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Stretching it a bit there Mate, he has signed 7 players.

Not really, if you say he signed 7 players, then you have to say he let go 13players, not 110, 14 inc Nagy, 15 if you include Moore out on loan (his choice admittedly).

He’s 7 down on last season.  Okay, let’s call it 6 because of Gilmartin.  Hang on, back to net 8 - Mawson and Sessegnon. ?

A squad smaller by 8 senior players is quite a lot isn’t it?

33 minutes ago, NcnsBcfc said:

MA was obviously tasked with making the club self sustainable; and felt that his wheeler dealer approach was the best way for that to happen. What is noticable is of course, that this all didn't happen over one or two transfer windows. It was allowed to happen over the course of 3-4 years. Even the Kelly money was brought forward one season, so we could have the magical "first profit in 20 years" headline. It was in fact just stealing from Peter to pay Paul.

 

great post btw.

The timing of this transfer is about to come back and haunt us.  Had that money been put into 19/20’s accounts it would be counting towards this year and next year.

A bit if vanity about posting a profit…a poor decision in the long term.  @Mr Popodopolouswe talked about this in our DMs didn’t we!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

Not really, if you say he signed 7 players, then you have to say he let go 13players, not 110, 14 inc Nagy, 15 if you include Moore out on loan (his choice admittedly).

He’s 7 down on last season.  Okay, let’s call it 6 because of Gilmartin.  Hang on, back to net 8 - Mawson and Sessegnon. ?

A squad smaller by 8 senior players is quite a lot isn’t it?

great post btw.

The timing of this transfer is about to come back and haunt us.  Had that money been put into 19/20’s accounts it would be counting towards this year and next year.

A bit if vanity about posting a profit…a poor decision in the long term.  @Mr Popodopolouswe talked about this in our DMs didn’t we!

Yeah looking back now- a poor decision, as we discussed before. What was the fee in the end, £15m? Obviously the impact of the profit added to the prior profit and like the losses, that averaged due to Covid but would sure come in handy now- even for a couple of loans eg.

Although there was/is something about Future Financial Information or requirements for future reporting being lower if a profit posted IIRC but at the same time, it would have been better now tbh! Our FFP wouldn't have been affected for the worse at that time.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Supersonic Robin said:

This isn't really true IMO. Fans simply forget how bad we were last season.

Last season we were, statistically, the worst team in the league. Ignore big shiny stadiums, attendances, wage bills, transfer fees, size of clubs etc for a moment. The actual on field side that Pearson inherited was performing at lower standard than all 3 relegated teams - financially crippled Sheffield Wednesday, perennial Championship relegation fodder Rotherham, and resource-less Championship newbies Wycombe. 

Imagine we were neutrals looking on at Pearson inheriting that Wycombe side for a Championship season - what would our expectations have been for him/them? Of course we have much better resources than a club like Wycombe, but from a purely footballing performance based perspective it's a reasonable comparison. 

Statistically, we're no longer the worst team in the league, we're about the 7th worst team in the league (depending on your source of data). Personally, I also think we look a little bit better than last season - that small improvement is visible to the eye IMO. We've also cut the wage bill in making that change.

This is technically progress and improvement. I appreciate that it's relatively slow, frustrating progress. I also appreciate it's depressing that being the 7th worst in the league constitutes progress for us, but that's where we are. 

 

When you talk about statistically being the 7th worst team in the League, you are basically ignoring the fact that, even in the games we are picking up points, ie Stoke, Barnsley, etc we are still very, very poor. I refuse to believe there are two worse sides than us this season, let alone five, and the upcoming games against Derby and Hull will prove that.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, The Horse With No Name said:

When you talk about statistically being the 7th worst team in the League, you are basically ignoring the fact that, even in the games we are picking up points, ie Stoke, Barnsley, etc we are still very, very poor. I refuse to believe there are two worse sides than us this season, let alone five, and the upcoming games against Derby and Hull will prove that.

Actually the opposite is true if anything (though my fault for not being clearer).

When I say "statistically", I mean to refer to our underlying stats (predominantly xG numbers), as oppose to our actual results/league position. The two happen to be the same thing right now - we're 18th in the league, and InfoGol has us as roughly the 18th best team in the league performance wise so far.
That xG (or xP) prediction attempts to assess how many points you "deserve" based on performances, so it accounts for the effect of "lucky wins". Obviously it's not perfect, but it generally gives a reasonable estimate across larger ranges of data.

We are poor, but most teams in the bottom third are! When you include the effect of points deductions, I do think there are at least 3 worse teams than us, even if it's closer than we'd like. IMO our survival is very much in our own hands. The Derby and Hull games feel important though.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Supersonic Robin said:

Actually the opposite is true if anything (though my fault for not being clearer).

When I say "statistically", I mean to refer to our underlying stats (predominantly xG numbers), as oppose to our actual results/league position. The two happen to be the same thing right now - we're 18th in the league, and InfoGol has us as roughly the 18th best team in the league performance wise so far.
That xG (or xP) prediction attempts to assess how many points you "deserve" based on performances, so it accounts for the effect of "lucky wins". Obviously it's not perfect, but it generally gives a reasonable estimate across larger ranges of data.

We are poor, but most teams in the bottom third are! When you include the effect of points deductions, I do think there are at least 3 worse teams than us, even if it's closer than we'd like. IMO our survival is very much in our own hands. The Derby and Hull games feel important though.

 

 

I also think it is easy to think our opponents are better because we aren’t playing well.  It’s a kind of unconscious bias.  There is a lot of a 90 minutes where no team is in control, but we see naturally that as City are worse.  An opposition attack always looks more threatening whatever team you’re supporting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I also think it is easy to think our opponents are better because we aren’t playing well.  It’s a kind of unconscious bias.  There is a lot of a 90 minutes where no team is in control, but we see naturally that as City are worse.  An opposition attack always looks more threatening whatever team you’re supporting.

Good point.

Barnsley for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but to think that Pearson and Fleming urgently need competent, top-class coaching help. We know how this was critical to the Pearson success at Leicester.

Ultimately, Sunday showed that the midfield doesn't function without a holding, tackling player. We look a shadow of the side when Williams and/or James are not available. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/11/2021 at 15:34, marmite said:

This club lost its momentum when Cotts left.  Yes LJ did ok up until the Man Utd game when he thought he had become Jurgen Klopp.  We've been sliding backwards since then and now relegation is a real possibility, it may be to late for the club to wake up. We may well be heading back to our average position of Champ/Div 1 yo yo club.. Opportunities have been wasted and so the cycle continues.

Brilliant so true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

I also think it is easy to think our opponents are better because we aren’t playing well.  It’s a kind of unconscious bias.  There is a lot of a 90 minutes where no team is in control, but we see naturally that as City are worse.  An opposition attack always looks more threatening whatever team you’re supporting.

No.

For me, every other team looks better than us because they all try to play football.

We have ONE tactic, kick it long to Martin and try to feed off the scraps.

I can't believe that people are still supporting Pearson when this is clearly how he wants them to play (if it wasn't, he would tell them to stop doing it surely?) and his City record to date shows that it doesn't work.

People can blame the players/previous managers etc all they like, but if this is the extent of Pearson's coaching ability then the blame stops totally with him.

Show me ANY evidence, ANYTHING, to show me that I'm wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, ooRya said:

No.

For me, every other team looks better than us because they all try to play football.

We have ONE tactic, kick it long to Martin and try to feed off the scraps.

I can't believe that people are still supporting Pearson when this is clearly how he wants them to play (if it wasn't, he would tell them to stop doing it surely?) and his City record to date shows that it doesn't work.

People can blame the players/previous managers etc all they like, but if this is the extent of Pearson's coaching ability then the blame stops totally with him.

Show me ANY evidence, ANYTHING, to show me that I'm wrong

Guess what?  We don’t all think the same as you! ??‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

Actually the tactic is not kick it long. That might transpire on the pitch, but that is not the instruction. It happens when you have no midfield and a lack of technically able players. But is not what the coaching staff ask for. Ask to go to Failand and see it yourself. 

Are you seriously telling me that the players deliberately ignore what their manager is telling them to do, every single game?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

Go and watch a session . Then decide . It is due to lack of confidence , ability and being on the big stage and not able to perform . Ask to watch a session then make your mind up  and try and work out why the big difference . 

I can't argue against what you're saying, because I haven't seen them train, so I'll take your word for it.

But, Pearson stands on the sidelines on a matchday, if he didn't want it to happen he could put a stop to it......couldn't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/11/2021 at 16:21, Davefevs said:

Loads has changed.  Things take time.

Today was poor, last Wednesday and last Saturday were better weren’t they?  We are gonna have inconsistent performances.  We shouldn’t have to see performances like today, but in the cycle of change we are in, it’s exactly what you are gonna see.  We took 4 points from 3 games, 3 tough games.  Vital points.

 

I echo what Davefevs is saying. We have to be realistic. ANY points we can get will be hard earned. I don't profess to like the type of football we play but when you're having to start a rebuilding job yet again with a totally new mindset after years of selling our best players and not replacing adequately coupled with the way the club has been run we should not be surprised the way the team has been performing.

There have been changes and overall there is an improvement. We now have a very capable manager who has a clear vision moving forward.

We just have to grind it out for the time being

  • Like 3
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, ooRya said:

But, Pearson stands on the sidelines on a matchday, if he didn't want it to happen he could put a stop to it......couldn't he?

He will - but it's a long term fix not a quick one. It requires time and money, neither of which he's had.

Yes it's rubbish at the moment, We just have to pray we can grind it out this season.

After that, if Pearson is given sufficient time, the team will look completely different to the current bunch of misfits. AND we'll be playing better football. The clues are already there - Atkinson wasn't bought because he's 6'3", he was bought because he's 6'3" and can pass the ball. Tanner started at Man Utd, so good pedigree, and at Carlisle proved himself an excellent attacking full back. Expect more in a similar vein.

What we need is time. No idea if Pearson will be given it or if relegation can be avoided but that's the answer to properly fixing this thing - time and money.

Someone other than Pearson may be capable of getting better results with the current lot but not by much and we certainly wouldn't be knocking it around like Barcelona.  

Edited by Merrick's Marvels
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, billywedlock said:

Go and watch a session . Then decide . It is due to lack of confidence , ability and being on the big stage and not able to perform . Ask to watch a session then make your mind up  and try and work out why the big difference . 

Not having a pop Billy but, a genuine question if I may, what do you perceive to be our 'style of play' as I can't see one at the moment, which is pretty dispiriting?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ooRya said:

I'm sorry, but that's far too simplistic an answer.

Most of the time there isn't any intention of even trying to play it out.

Here’s a fuller one ?

You missed Kalas and Baker splitting inside our own penalty area to receive a goal kick v Stoke then?  We do attempt to play out.  The fact was that on the second attempt to do it, Bentley tried to knock a ball into Williams, by bending it around the Stoke man blocking the passing lane.  We managed to snuff out the chance, but then in our players minds it’s “shit, I cocked up, I can’t do that again”, so they stop doing it.

For info here’s Bents stats over several games.

936ABF7B-F630-4557-9F25-BE5556463A22.thumb.jpeg.a551e224882fd312cfefbc8b208ef4d5.jpeg

What I would say is that when we fail to do something we stop doing it.  It’s a bit of weak mentality, rather than trusting what you’ve done in training and prepared for.

Im not saying we are trying to play total football, just that there are circumstances why we dont.

Blsckpool we’re one of the best passing sides in Lg1.  Through our press in the first league game, we made then go long more times than all bar about 2 or 3 games the season before.  So opposition has a massive bearing on what we are trying to do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/11/2021 at 15:34, marmite said:

This club lost its momentum when Cotts left.  Yes LJ did ok up until the Man Utd game when he thought he had become Jurgen Klopp.  

I disagree with you there, mate. At the Man Utd game it was clear to me that LJ thought he was Christopher Dean, whereas in fact he struck me more as Jane Torvill

On 28/11/2021 at 15:34, marmite said:

 We've been sliding backwards since then 

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...