Off Field Metrics, realistically do we deserve more?

[zombie]

We’re always hearing about on the field metrics; XG, pass completion %, aerial, duels, distance covered etc….

They are useful indicators when assessing the game or players.

However, when trying to objectively assess the club how should we do it? We all want the same thing, a realistic playoff or title challenge, but realistically nowadays with parachute payments is that fair?

Some expect top 10 or higher, but what areas of the club are top 10? Do we have a top 10 transfer budget? Top 10 wages? Top 10 attendances? Is the HPC a top 10 training facility?

We’ve never been in the Prem (I know there was football before that), but realistically we’re not a Leeds. There’s nothing wrong with ambitions and aspirations, I’d love more success on the pitch, I wouldn’t mind a few more lows as long as I get the highs too, we are mediocre, chatting to Leicester fans last Friday reminded me how boring being a City fan has been in recent years.

I’m no supporter of the current ownership and leadership, but am grateful for the stability and platform they’ve given us, but are they being too harshly treated and do we, like all fans, have unrealistic expectations?

The top 6 is predictably predominately recent Prem clubs, the only surprise being Ipswich, even teams which have arguably gone for it like Hull signing Fabio Carvahlo to their fairly star studded squad only sit a couple of places above, it makes you wonder if it’s worth having a real go, I do appreciate the likes of what Luton, Brentford etc… have done, but if you don’t have the very best leadership, huge ambition and some good fortune is it worth sinking millions in when there’s unlikely to be return on investment, in fact does being more sustainable make us more attractive to a prospective buyer, is SL holding back financially (compared to his history) potentially doing us a favour in the long run?

We all want Prem or even Championship top 6, but why should we expect it if we don’t have a top 6 squad, back room team, board, transfer/wage budget, attendances etc… Is it unfair to expect more when everything about us screams mid table?

I would like to know why some may feel we should be considerably higher, we all want more, but would that reflect what is happening off the pitch relative to our rivals? Are some fans being a little entitled? Hopefully if anyone replies they have something to say regarding some off the field areas where we may excel (like the minutes players from the HPC play) or where we are mid table or lower and this doesn’t just turn this into another NP v LM or BT/JL are clueless thread.

[cidercity1987]

In a usual season our attendances are at least top third, or if not top six. So there is that. I appreciate this season they are midtable as there are a number of well supported clubs, but our crowds are higher than Stoke for example and way higher than loads of the mentioned ex Prem clubs like Blackburn.

We cannot compete with parachute clubs but we should be able to compete well with every single one of the remaining non parachute clubs. It's totally embarrassing that 50 clubs or more (many with far less resources) have made it to the Prem and we have not.

I am not aware that being an ex Premier League club gives any greater right or even resources to challenge instead of us?

[Mr Popodopolous]

We should hope for and expect for better yes.

Our attendances are middling in a divisional context, our Training Ground is pretty good, our pathway Academy and as a club looked a useful one under Gould and Pearson, one couldn't be helped hut we totally screwed the other one.

Our Revenue will certainly fall within the top 10. Subject to FFP overhang going into last and this year, moving forward we should be capable of providing a top 10 budget based on that yes. I reckon our Turnover being 7th or 8th is a reasonable view to take.

Greater sustainability should on paper makes us more attractive to a prospective buyer but the price could be less prohibitive. Perhaps  the new Financial Regulations that are proposed will help, but again somewhat Price Permitting.

Edited April 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[cidercity1987]

What is it about clubs like West Brom who despite averaging only about 1,000 fans more than us, always get their act together and finish at least in the play offs every few years with or without parachute payments. What do they have that we do not? A winning mentality?? Same applies to loads of clubs of very similar resources.

Why can't we EVER finish above tiny PNE?? And don't say because they won a few things 100 years ago as that is totally irrelevant to resource generation in 2024.

Edited April 3 by cidercity1987

[Bristol Oil Services]

There's three slots for going up, not even the mighty ("we are not worthy") Leeds United can fill all of those; and four play-off spaces, to give you a shot. 

We're not a Leeds? We're not even a bloody Luton, for crying out loud. 

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

5 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

What is it about clubs like West Brom who despite averaging only about 1,000 fans more than us, always get their act together and finish at least in the play offs every few years with or without parachute payments. What do they have that we do not? A winning mentality?? Same applies to loads of clubs of very similar resources.

Why can't we EVER finish above tiny PNE?? And don't say because they won a few things 100 years ago as that is totally irrelevant to resource generation in 2024.

They were in receipt of PL cash or Parachute money between 2002-03 to 2022-23, that helps a lot.

One report says wage bill of £45mish last year that helps. If they stay down this year they may well have to cut cloth, first year post Parachutes atm.

Preston ie more valid. They've had some creative recruitment this year..players from Denmark, Swiss League in case of Millar (Canadian iirc), Slovenia. They definitely seem to have something intangible albeit their underlying numbers in some respects are horrible.

They used to get rather a lot of penalties too, that helps.

Edited April 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[FNQ]

14 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

What is it about clubs like West Brom who despite averaging only about 1,000 fans more than us, always get their act together and finish at least in the play offs every few years with or without parachute payments. What do they have that we do not? A winning mentality?? Same applies to loads of clubs of very similar resources.

Why can't we EVER finish above tiny PNE?? And don't say because they won a few things 100 years ago as that is totally irrelevant to resource generation in 2024.

Ummm… Could it have anything to do with our owners versus other teams owners?

[cidercity1987]

1 minute ago, FNQ said:

Ummm… Could it have anything to do with our owners versus other teams owners?

EXACTLY, which is the opposite of the point the opening poster is making

[zombie]

2 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

EXACTLY, which is the opposite of the point the opening poster is making

Nope, Mr Pop has replied to you and pointed how that they’ve been receiving Prem cash or PP for the last 20+ years, so comparing WBA and ourselves is like comparing apple as and oranges. Comparing ourselves with Preston, Millwall is more realistic than the Baggies.

As the OP I wasn’t making a point, I was asking do we deserve to be higher or does our position fairly reflect other metrics.

Not sure I can agree with your story/recall of us having top 6 gates either.

[zombie]

42 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

In a usual season our attendances are at least top third, or if not top six. So there is that. I appreciate this season they are midtable as there are a number of well supported clubs, but our crowds are higher than Stoke for example and way higher than loads of the mentioned ex Prem clubs like Blackburn.

We cannot compete with parachute clubs but we should be able to compete well with every single one of the remaining non parachute clubs. It's totally embarrassing that 50 clubs or more (many with far less resources) have made it to the Prem and we have not.

I am not aware that being an ex Premier League club gives any greater right or even resources to challenge instead of us?

Not sure on attendance, seems unlikely, but no problem admitting I’m wrong if that’s the case.

I also can’t agree with your last line, being an ex Prem Club definitely gives greater resources to challenge.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I would also say WBA are a bigger club than us historically but how much difference that makes Idk.

Edited April 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[Bristol Oil Services]

Just now, zombie said:

Nope, Mr Pop has replied to you and pointed how that they’ve been receiving Prem cash or PP for the last 20+ years, so comparing WBA and ourselves is like comparing apple as and oranges. Comparing ourselves with Preston, Millwall is more realistic than the Baggies.

As the OP I wasn’t making a point, I was asking do we deserve to be higher or does our position fairly reflect other metrics.

Not sure I can agree with your story/recall of us having top 6 gates either.

If we want promotion from this division then I would think rather a greater percentage of our support than ever before now understand that that is only likely and can only be hoped for with a change in ownership (whilst acknowledging that such a change does not guarantee anything of the sort). We are, currently, stuck between a rock and a hard place, treading water. It would seem.

Hardly surprising that people are agitating for something more, something new or fresh, in the circumstances  (whilst being ever so careful what we wish for).

[zombie]

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I would also say WBA are a bigger club than us historically but how much difference that makes Idk.

No doubt, that will make a difference to fan base. I think our supporter numbers are fantastic considering our history.

Also, having been an established Prem or even yo-yo club make them potentially more attractive to new signings than us.

[Fordy62]

I’d genuinely just be happy if we had a team who performed better than the sum of its parts. I think that’s what was starting to happen under Nige and that’s what makes it all the more annoying. 

Let’s be honest, a team togetherness and over performing is the only way we’ll get out of this league upwards, because as you rightly point out, we can’t compete any other way. 

[cidercity1987]

29 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

They were in receipt of PL cash or Parachute money between 2002-03 to 2022-23, that helps a lot.

One report says wage bill of £45mish last year that helps. If they stay down this year they may well have to cut cloth, first year post Parachutes atm.

Preston ie more valid. They've had some creative recruitment this year..players from Denmark, Swiss League in case of Millar (Canadian iirc), Slovenia. They definitely seem to have something intangible albeit their underlying numbers in some respects are horrible.

They used to get rather a lot of penalties too, that helps.

 

4 minutes ago, zombie said:

Nope, Mr Pop has replied to you and pointed how that they’ve been receiving Prem cash or PP for the last 20+ years, so comparing WBA and ourselves is like comparing apple as and oranges. Comparing ourselves with Preston, Millwall is more realistic than the Baggies.

As the OP I wasn’t making a point, I was asking do we deserve to be higher or does our position fairly reflect other metrics.

Not sure I can agree with your story/recall of us having top 6 gates either.

 

1 minute ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I would also say WBA are a bigger club than us historically but how much difference that makes Idk.

Maybe WBA was a bad comparison if they have always had Parachute payments. Not sure what bigger club historically means in the race for the Prem but it all appears to boil down to that? Something totally intangible? Is that why other clubs of similar or lower resources always eventually make it back to the Prem? Something intangible?? All sorts of clubs

Clubs with a few more fans than us Middlesbrough, Coventry, 

Clubs with far less fans and resources than us QPR, Blackburn, Watford (without parachute)

Bloody hell Cardiff, Swansea, Huddersfield, Hull

All these clubs manage a go at it every now and again

Why do we have to compare ourselves to clubs with far less fans like Millwall and Preston. I literally do not understand. 

Ultimately my conclusion is that it is the OWNER

[Mr Popodopolous]

3 minutes ago, zombie said:

No doubt, that will make a difference to fan base. I think our supporter numbers are fantastic considering our history.

Also, having been an established Prem or even yo-yo club make them potentially more attractive to new signings than us.

Our support has been excellent totally agree. Fanbase has grown significantly post redevelopment albeit this season's events I hope don't hit it too hard.

Agreed.

[IAmNick]

12 minutes ago, zombie said:

As the OP I wasn’t making a point, I was asking do we deserve to be higher or does our position fairly reflect other metrics.

It may well do - but being "well run" should mean you outperform your expectation, and poorly run means you underperform. That goes for both on and off the pitch.

If we're exactly where we'd expect, we're just average. We do some things well, and some poorly, which sounds like a fair reflection on our club at the moment I think.

I reckon our mid table finishes are broadly reflective of where we should be as a club. perhaps a little poor if you look at the total investment over the last 10 years or so, but I also think that can be seen as somewhat of a failure as we should be trying to outperform expectations, not be happy with matching them.

I don't think that's being entitled, personally.

Edited April 3 by IAmNick

[ExiledAjax]

1 hour ago, zombie said:

Top 10 wages?

This is pretty much the only off field metric that's been shown to have a close correlation, maybe even a causal link, to league table position.

The others you mention are pretty irrelevant. Transfer budget fluctuates depending on transfer receipts amd FFP/P&S rules, quality of training facility might have a small influence on the quality of player a club attracts, but if it does it's hard to quantify.

Attendance/tickets sold is far from causal when it comes to team performance - if anything the link is reversed ie more success = more fans rather than the other way round.

It's really just wage budget that matters, and in that regard I think we're normally ranked at around about 10th. One of the highest non-PP teams, but small fry compared to those teams.

We're probably going to finish just below 10th this season. So it's going to be just worse than par, maybe a bogey for the season.

Edited April 3 by ExiledAjax

[Mr Popodopolous]

23 minutes ago, cidercity1987 said:

 

 

Maybe WBA was a bad comparison if they have always had Parachute payments. Not sure what bigger club historically means in the race for the Prem but it all appears to boil down to that? Something totally intangible? Is that why other clubs of similar or lower resources always eventually make it back to the Prem? Something intangible?? All sorts of clubs

Clubs with a few more fans than us Middlesbrough, Coventry, 

Clubs with far less fans and resources than us QPR, Blackburn, Watford (without parachute)

Bloody hell Cardiff, Swansea, Huddersfield, Hull

All these clubs manage a go at it every now and again

Why do we have to compare ourselves to clubs with far less fans like Millwall and Preston. I literally do not understand. 

Ultimately my conclusion is that it is the OWNER

We very much fail to stick and twist at the right time, and that does ultimately come down to the Owner definitely.

This summer was a time to start to build on the solid base, yes extend NP and add a bit of sparkle to the decent unit we have.

January 2008 was very much a time to twist, FFP was a twinkle in Platini's eye. We needed 4 or 5 strong additions to strike while the iron was hot.

2017-18 similar but FFP was a constraining factor.

I'd argue post the big sales in summer 2018 we were also too cautious in January 2019...not saying go nuts but another central midfielder felt a must. (Korey rolling injuries, Hegeler retired- we were playing Pack and Brownhill into the ground).

A third man or a rotation option could have eased that pressure. Morrell and Walsh were here but weren't deemed ready or trusted.

Edited April 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[FNQ]

9 minutes ago, Fordy62 said:

I’d genuinely just be happy if we had a team who performed better than the sum of its parts. I think that’s what was starting to happen under Nige and that’s what makes it all the more annoying. 

Let’s be honest, a team togetherness and over performing is the only way we’ll get out of this league upwards, because as you rightly point out, we can’t compete any other way. 

I agree it’ll always be tough.. but the owners could have supported the manager and reinvested the profits made from the sale of AS to give us every chance… he didn’t, still hasn’t and most likely won’t. A change in direction from the top can be the only way forward.

[22A]

59 minutes ago, Bristol Oil Services said:

We're not a Leeds? We're not even a bloody Luton, for crying out loud. 

 

For years if not decades Brentford, Brighton and Bournemouth were all (seemingly) consistently in Div 3. It doesn't seem that lo g ago Brighton travelled to Hereford on the last day of the season knowing whoever lost would be dropping into the Conference (as was). Now those three Bs are settled Prem clubs.

[Mr Popodopolous]

1 minute ago, 22A said:

For years if not decades Brentford, Brighton and Bournemouth were all (seemingly) consistently in Div 3. It doesn't seem that lo g ago Brighton travelled to Hereford on the last day of the season knowing whoever lost would be dropping into the Conference (as was). Now those three Bs are settled Prem clubs.

Excellent model, excellent model plus infrastructure in place at the right time, cheated when it was easy to do so and reaped the benefits. Would be a quick summary.

I completely get what you are saying though. Would add that by some metrics we are perhaps historically reasonable and yet the club at the top levels is run so poorly that it feels the case that we are a reasonable Championship side despite the hierarchy. (In particular Jon Lansdown and Tinnion. Marshall doesn't seem impressive either). Proper governance could push us on.

[JAWS]

23 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

We very much fail to stick and twist at the right time, and that does ultimately come down to the Owner definitely.

This summer was a time to start to build on the solid base, yes extend NP and add a bit of sparkle to the decent unit we have.

January 2008 was very much a time to twist, FFP was a twinkle in Platini's eye. We needed 4 or 5 string additions to strike while the iron was hot.

2017-18 similar but FFP was a constraining factor.

I'd argue post the big sales in summer 2018 we were also too cautious in January 2019...not saying go nuts but another central midfielder felt a must. (Korey rolling injuries, Hegeler retired- we were playing Pack and Brownhill into the ground).

A third man or a rotation option could have eased that pressure. Morrell and Walsh were here but weren't deemed ready or trusted.

Jan'08 & Pre season after Cotts promotion are two stand out opportunities. Last summer was an opportunity to build on the progress NP had made. SL can never seem to get it right as you say pops

[Mr Popodopolous]

6 minutes ago, JAWS said:

Jan'08 & Pre season after Cotts promotion are two stand out opportunities. Last summer was an opportunity to build on the progress NP had made. SL can never seem to get it right as you say pops

Ah yes I forgot about the Cotts one JAWS. That was s chance for momentum but I get the impression thst yet again we were trying to balance thst and finance. May as well have pushed through with Maguire and Gray..would have meant a happier Cotts and  more cohesove side although I did two financial modelling scenarios and did wonder a bit.

The base..let's think back.

Fielding

Little, Ayling, Flint, Williams, Bryan

Pack, Smith, Freeman

Wilbraham, Agard

Sure I'm missing varied. Wagstaff was he still here? We added Kodjia early iirc. I forget who the reserve keepers were.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of specific deals we actually begun the season with a weaker or at least thinner squad than we came up with and that's unacceptable really.

We strengthened it piecemeal and gradually thereafter but you're always playing catchup.

Edited April 3 by Mr Popodopolous

[JAWS]

7 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Ah yes I forgot about the Cotts one JAWS. That was s chance for momentum but I get the impression thst yet again we were trying to balance thst and finance. May as well have pushed through with Maguire and Gray..would have meant a happier Cotts and  more cohesove side although I did two financial modelling scenarios and did wonder a bit.

The base..let's think back.

Fielding

Little, Ayling, Flint, Williams, Bryan

Pack, Smith, Freeman

Wilbraham, Agard

Sure I'm missing varied. Wagstaff was he still here? We added Kodjia early iirc. I forget who the reserve keepers were.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of specific deals we actually begun the season with a weaker or at least thinner squad than we came up with and that's unacceptable really.

We strengthened it piecemeal and gradually thereafter but you're always playing catchup.

SL just seems to get cold feet when it's comes to the crunch almost like he'd get cold sweats & sleepless nights if he pushed the boat out. I recall him being quite candid after the Cotts promotion saying how surprised he was at the level of championship wages. Almost like he couldn't come to terms with it & that's probably why he intervened on the maguire & gray deals 

[DaveInSA]

It’s Steve Lansdown.

He’s the problem.

He wouldn’t be able to recognise a window of opportunity if it painted itself red, and chased him around the golf course in Guernsey saying “Hey Steve, I’m a window of opportunity, I’m a window of opportunity”. 

In addition to the above he hasn’t one clue about how football clubs should be governed and run int he 21st century. There hasn’t been a consistent approach in what we do from a footballing strategy ever. Hence we don’t know if we’re overachieving or not, whether momentum is with us or not and whether to take a risk to achieve something.

It’s pathetic. And amateur. 

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 minutes ago, DaveInSA said:

It’s Steve Lansdown.

He’s the problem.

He wouldn’t be able to recognise a window of opportunity if it painted itself red, and chased him around the golf course in Guernsey saying “Hey Steve, I’m a window of opportunity, I’m a window of opportunity”. 

In addition to the above he hasn’t one clue about how football clubs should be governed and run int he 21st century. There hasn’t been a consistent approach in what we do from a footballing strategy ever. Hence we don’t know if we’re overachieving or not, whether momentum is with us or not and whether to take a risk to achieve something.

It’s pathetic. And amateur. 

I have a secondary concern in addition to your post which would make it worst of all worlds.

If Jon Lansdown truly steps up medium term (Please no!!) then not only will we have that but we will have the risk of recklessness that nearly has more lasting damage on top of choosing the wrong horse ie the Ashton, Lee Johnson era.

ie some bumbling and strategy swings plus financial recklessness risk thrown in for good measure. If that occurs, will we find another Gould and NP team to navigate us through? 

[JAWS]

27 minutes ago, JAWS said:

SL just seems to get cold feet when it's comes to the crunch almost like he'd get cold sweats & sleepless nights if he pushed the boat out. I recall him being quite candid after the Cotts promotion saying how surprised he was at the level of championship wages. Almost like he couldn't come to terms with it & that's probably why he intervened on the maguire & gray deals 

The frustration is that he trusted Cotts & Keith Burt in the previous pre season and reaped the rewards but failed to trust them again cos things were beyond his comfort level. That's his problem. He can't help meddling in football decisions when he has no experience of football decisions! You think he would've learnt by now......

[Supersonic Robin]

In the long term, the biggest off-field metric is the size of the city the club is based in.

If you look throughout any football league system in the world, there's a strong trend that the biggest/best teams are those based in the biggest cities.

For instance, in the UK, the 4 biggest cities are responsible for 8 of the 10 biggest teams in the country:

• London (Arsenal, Tottenham, Chelsea)
• Manchester (Man U, Man C)
• Liverpool (Liverpool, Everton)
• Birmingham (Aston VIlla)

[Supersonic Robin]

2 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

I would also say WBA are a bigger club than us historically but how much difference that makes Idk.

 

I always find that argument flawed in these discussions.......
 

Person 1: Why have WBA achieved more than us?

Person 2: Becuase they're a bigger club.

Person 1: But how/why are they a bigger club?

Person 2: Because they've achieved more than us.