Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sgncfc

Top 26

Recommended Posts

We're currently 20th, so we are comfortably on plan in terms of what we were promised by Webber/Farke. As long as we stay in the top 6 after relegation we'll still be on plan. No one seems to be complaining about the manner in which they are going about achieving the plan - we are playing good football, promoting youth etc and we have a balance, involved and even admired community club, which is currently comfortably self-funded, with no debt and assets of several 10s of £millions. So, in business terms we are achieving everything we have set out to do. To have done that in less than 3 years from where we were is little short of astonishing, but let's park that thought.

Those who are unhappy with where we currently are must therefore take issue with the plan itself - namely that "Top 26" statement - when they scream "Delia out" or "lack of ambition", if relegation is deemed as "failure" when it is actually still on that plan.

So is there a realistic alternative plan for a club like Norwich City, in a county which is acknowledged as a bit remote, in a city which is not that big, with a population catchment which is both small (in comparison to others) and spread over several hundred square miles?

This is a genuine question - what do those who are unhappy honestly believe we should be aiming for as an alternative "plan"? If Top 26 becomes Top 17 do we care about how we go about it? Would we, as a supporter base, be happy to be a Burnley or even a Newcastle?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon those who are unhappy with being Norwich now will also then be unhappy with our becoming a Burnley- if that could somehow happen - ie temporary mid-table PL residence , modest stadium, low profile, uninspiring play, big backers.

if we somehow became a Newcastle - big profile , huge stadium, big support, (relatively) huge backing, unsuccessful football - then they would be unhappy we’re not Liverpool

etc etc

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think in part the issue with the 'top 26' idea is that it provides a ready-made excuse for the lack of investment we saw this summer. If we go up, don't spend any money and then come straight back down it is still in the plan.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally would like to be a "Burnley" competing in the PL for a few seasons now , without being the richest or high profile club! But at least they didn't make the mistake of thinking they would stand a chance , without investing in the squad... I think this was a big mistake by those in charge during the summer. 

I agree with Kingo on the "ready-made excuse" , they have 4 relegation. Surely they were just a tad naive in the summer?

Then again, I don't want us to sell out and lose our identity as a club! I am not a doom monger who thinks everything's lost because we get relegated. We will have a very big job on our hands next season in the Championship though! We'll lose a few players and the football will be completely different again... top 6 ? Not sure...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ROBFLECK said:

I personally would like to be a "Burnley" competing in the PL for a few seasons now , without being the richest or high profile club! But at least they didn't make the mistake of thinking they would stand a chance , without investing in the squad... I think this was a big mistake by those in charge during the summer. 

I agree with Kingo on the "ready-made excuse" , they have 4 relegation. Surely they were just a tad naive in the summer?

Then again, I don't want us to sell out and lose our identity as a club! I am not a doom monger who thinks everything's lost because we get relegated. We will have a very big job on our hands next season in the Championship though! We'll lose a few players and the football will be completely different again... top 6 ? Not sure...

That isn't what Burnley did. They went with the two steps forwards, one step back approach we are trying. They hadn't been in the top flight since the mid-70s. Got to the PL in 2008-09 and got relegated straight away. Got promoted again after four seasons, didn't overspend to try to stay up and got relegated straight away, aiming to build slowly without being tied down with high-wage players. And the next time they stayed up and have styed up, and probably will this season.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

That isn't what Burnley did. They went with the two steps forwards, one step back approach we are trying. They hadn't been in the top flight since the mid-70s. Got to the PL in 2008-09 and got relegated straight away. Got promoted again after four seasons, didn't overspend to try to stay up and got relegated straight away, aiming to build slowly without being tied down with high-wage players. And the next time they stayed up and have styed up, and probably will this season.

This is true. But I find when posters want to be other clubs they don't want the journey these other clubs made or their destination. All they want is where they are in a very small window of time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PurpleCanary said:

That isn't what Burnley did. They went with the two steps forwards, one step back approach we are trying. They hadn't been in the top flight since the mid-70s. Got to the PL in 2008-09 and got relegated straight away. Got promoted again after four seasons, didn't overspend to try to stay up and got relegated straight away, aiming to build slowly without being tied down with high-wage players. And the next time they stayed up and have styed up, and probably will this season.

I'm not saying they did , I am just stating that I would take being Burnley and staying in the PL for a few seasons! I don't agree with the decisions our directors made...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, nutty nigel said:

This is true. But I find when posters want to be other clubs they don't want the journey these other clubs made or their destination. All they want is where they are in a very small window of time.

I admit, I am guilty... but you don't know what will come! they claim they will be a top 26 team... Championship is very difficult league and unpredictable! I am not so sure we will be top 26 next season are you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ROBFLECK said:

I admit, I am guilty... but you don't know what will come! they claim they will be a top 26 team... Championship is very difficult league and unpredictable! I am not so sure we will be top 26 next season are you?

Of course not. Just like you're not sure where we'd be if we'd financed more signings rather than secure other parts of the club. It's football so there is no certain future.

Edited by nutty nigel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

Of course not. Just like you're not sure where we'd be if we'd financed more signings rather than secure other parts of the club. It's football so there is no certain future.

I don't claim to be sure Nutty , but I do however disagree... which is my opinion , yet I respect yours. The uncertain future is a fact which I won't dispute...but there are a few clubs that did a better job and are not bottom of the PL or were/are able to stay in the PL for quite a long run. Our beloved club are kings among the yoyo'ers , which I deplore

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

That isn't what Burnley did. They went with the two steps forwards, one step back approach we are trying. They hadn't been in the top flight since the mid-70s. Got to the PL in 2008-09 and got relegated straight away. Got promoted again after four seasons, didn't overspend to try to stay up and got relegated straight away, aiming to build slowly without being tied down with high-wage players. And the next time they stayed up and have styed up, and probably will this season.

Thing is though Purple they only went down once and then went back up and have stayed up.

We've already been down twice in recent years, this will be the third relegation so its not quite the same is it!

In answer to the original question i'm not happy with "top 26" as our target. It is a target that lacks ambition and is conveniently chosen because they know we are at the ceiling that can be achieved under their model. It allows for failure (i.e. relegation.)

The target should be to be in and then stay in the premier league for as long as is possible. If we come down, then anything other than promotion next season will be a massive failure, even losing in the playoffs would be. Technically we could finish 6ht, lose in the playoffs and we will still be hitting our target. That can't be right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Thing is though Purple they only went down once and then went back up and have stayed up.

We've already been down twice in recent years, this will be the third relegation so its not quite the same is it!

In answer to the original question i'm not happy with "top 26" as our target. It is a target that lacks ambition and is conveniently chosen because they know we are at the ceiling that can be achieved under their model. It allows for failure (i.e. relegation.)

The target should be to be in and then stay in the premier league for as long as is possible. If we come down, then anything other than promotion next season will be a massive failure, even losing in the playoffs would be. Technically we could finish 6ht, lose in the playoffs and we will still be hitting our target. That can't be right.

Any sensible model should definitely factor this in, otherwise it's incompetence potentially leading to the poorhouse.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, ROBFLECK said:

I'm not saying they did , I am just stating that I would take being Burnley and staying in the PL for a few seasons! I don't agree with the decisions our directors made...

But at least they didn't make the mistake of thinking they would stand a chance , without investing in the squad...

That was just what you said. You said they didn't make the the supposed mistake of not investing in the squad and so getting relegated, when that was just what they did. Thery deliberately didn't overspend, knowing it reduced their chances of staying up, but working on the basis it would lead to a gradual improvement in the squad, so eventually they would stay up, at least for some seasons.

And so far it has worked, but it includerd in effect assuming (not wanting, but assuming) a relegation, which then happened, just as we have done. If we have a model we are following it is Burnley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

That isn't what Burnley did. They went with the two steps forwards, one step back approach we are trying. They hadn't been in the top flight since the mid-70s. Got to the PL in 2008-09 and got relegated straight away. Got promoted again after four seasons, didn't overspend to try to stay up and got relegated straight away, aiming to build slowly without being tied down with high-wage players. And the next time they stayed up and have styed up, and probably will this season.

Have i stumbled upon a Burnley model post with a touch of i wish we were Burnley added in for good measure ? 😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

Thing is though Purple they only went down once and then went back up and have stayed up.

We've already been down twice in recent years, this will be the third relegation so its not quite the same is it!

In answer to the original question i'm not happy with "top 26" as our target. It is a target that lacks ambition and is conveniently chosen because they know we are at the ceiling that can be achieved under their model. It allows for failure (i.e. relegation.)

The target should be to be in and then stay in the premier league for as long as is possible. If we come down, then anything other than promotion next season will be a massive failure, even losing in the playoffs would be. Technically we could finish 6ht, lose in the playoffs and we will still be hitting our target. That can't be right.

No, they have been down twice in recent years, and straight down. Only the third time did they stay up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PurpleCanary said:

But at least they didn't make the mistake of thinking they would stand a chance , without investing in the squad...

That was just what you said. You said they didn't make the the supposed mistake of not investing in the squad and so getting relegated, when that was just what they did. Thery deliberately didn't overspend, knowing it reduced their chances of staying up, but working on the basis it would lead to a gradual improvement in the squad, so eventually they would stay up, at least for some seasons.

And so far it has worked, but it includerd in effect assuming (not wanting, but assuming) a relegation, which then happened, just as we have done. If we have a model we are following it is Burnley.

You sound like you're part of the Burnley FC set up , inside knowledge? I assume (not want) that you completely agree with the way we went about things ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Fuzzar said:

Any sensible model should definitely factor this in, otherwise it's incompetence potentially leading to the poorhouse.

There is a difference between a model factoring something in and having it as your "target"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So some clubs will stay up and three will go down. Wanting to be one that stays up only works in a small window of time. Otherwise people would still be wanting to be Stoke, who have just scraped in the top 36 and look to be aiming for 41st.

It's not sustainable. Will folk still want to be Burnley for the next few years or would you like to reserve a few clubs who may replace them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

But at least they didn't make the mistake of thinking they would stand a chance , without investing in the squad...

That was just what you said. You said they didn't make the the supposed mistake of not investing in the squad and so getting relegated, when that was just what they did. Thery deliberately didn't overspend, knowing it reduced their chances of staying up, but working on the basis it would lead to a gradual improvement in the squad, so eventually they would stay up, at least for some seasons.

And so far it has worked, but it includerd in effect assuming (not wanting, but assuming) a relegation, which then happened, just as we have done. If we have a model we are following it is Burnley.

According to transfermarkt Burnley spent about £12m in the 14/15 season. While that still isn't loads, it is more than we did this season, despite TV revenue having increased significantly in the last 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

So some clubs will stay up and three will go down. Wanting to be one that stays up only works in a small window of time. Otherwise people would still be wanting to be Stoke, who have just scraped in the top 36 and look to be aiming for 41st.

It's not sustainable. Will folk still want to be Burnley for the next few years or would you like to reserve a few clubs who may replace them?

How about we be like Norwich, building on a stable foundation, by building the Cat 1 youth status, bringing through quality players from our system who know our club.

Getting relegated this season means we are in a very good financial position against any other club coming down with us, their wage bill will be vastly bigger than ours and will have more players which will need to be off loaded or want to go!

Promotion next time round could well be the point where we have a far stronger young squad because we’ve invested in a future with the consequence of relegation, sending our next few young players with potential out on loan, buying two quality youngsters and allowing them to stay with their clubs to gain more football.

We are in the best position we’ve been in for many years, great coach who played a very attractive successful brand of football.

So top 26 is the worst we will be in my book, but all likelihood end of next season we will be Top 21st.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

So some clubs will stay up and three will go down. Wanting to be one that stays up only works in a small window of time. Otherwise people would still be wanting to be Stoke, who have just scraped in the top 36 and look to be aiming for 41st.

It's not sustainable. Will folk still want to be Burnley for the next few years or would you like to reserve a few clubs who may replace them?

I don't want to be any other club Nutty, I want to be Norwich, in the premier league. I want us to take one of these opportunities and push on for at least a few seasons. I don't want us to be Burnley because we are in terms of support and potential a bigger club than Burnley. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, nutty nigel said:

How much have we spent this season? I've seen £750,00 bandied about on here. I'm sure that's not right.

You know we spent a lot more Buendia cost an additional 3.5 million in a promotion clause according to some on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Jim Smith said:

I don't want to be any other club Nutty, I want to be Norwich, in the premier league. I want us to take one of these opportunities and push on for at least a few seasons. I don't want us to be Burnley because we are in terms of support and potential a bigger club than Burnley. 

Exactly! I don't want to be anyone else. Ever. But I'm in the minority on here. I also don't covet other peoples money or other club's players. I think, realistically for me, there's no comparable club's last ten years that I'd swap with ours.

Oh, and you don't have to continually moan about our club to be ambitious. I want to win every game we play. And unlike most on here am still up for this season.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Indy said:

You know we spent a lot more Buendia cost an additional 3.5 million in a promotion clause according to some on here.

Really, thought that came free.

Does anybody have a reasonably researched figure on what we've spent this season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Farke has brought in 27 players, I believe, in last two years. While simultaneously saying we have no money, our hands are tied.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ARRIVALS at Carrow Road 2019/20


IBRAHIM AMADOU from Sevilla (LoanAugust 2019)
DANIEl ADSHEAD from Rochdale (June 2019)
ROCKY BUSHIRI from KV Oostende (July 2019)
SAM BYRAM from West Ham (July 2019)
JOSIP DRMIC from Borussia Monchengladbach (June 2019)
ONDREJ DUDA from Hertha Berlin (Loan, January 2020)
RALF FAHRMANN from Schalke (Loan, July 2019)
AIDAN FITZPATRICK from Partick Thistle (July 2019)
CHARLIE GILMOUR from Arsenal (July 2019)
ARCHIE MAIR from Aberdeen (June 2019)
REECE MCALEAR from Motherwell (August 2019)
SAM MCCALLUM from Coventry (January 2020)
ROB NIZET from Anderlecht (July 2019)
PATRICK ROBERTS from Man City (Loan, May 2019)
LUKAS RUPP from 1899 Hoffenheim (January 2020)
MELVIN SITTI from Sochaux (January 2020)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, king canary said:

According to transfermarkt Burnley spent about £12m in the 14/15 season. While that still isn't loads, it is more than we did this season, despite TV revenue having increased significantly in the last 5 years.

Yes but the real point is what kind of wages Burnley paid and whether they had adequate relegation clauses in place to ensure they were not crippled in the way we were after ther Neil relegation. I don't know the answers, but it was certainly said at the time by people who were well-informed that Burnley had been very prudent, because they did have this two steps forward, one back plan.

PS. Just found this from the Swiss Ramble, from a year or two back, which gives a good sense of Burnley's overall approach over the last decade:

"Unlike many clubs #BurnleyFC pay their own way. Since 2009 they generated £104m from operations. Of this, £52m went on players (net), while £16m was invested in infrastructure (mainly Barnfield training ground) and £16m interest/loan payments. £20m increased cash balance."

There is also a mention of strong relegation clauses.

Edited by PurpleCanary

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WBA, Stoke were, and now some Burnley supporters are, assuming they are top flight. So then it became a we don't like the style of football served up.

Now look at the first two names. Having to restart all over again. WBA making a decent fist after initially sacking a manger when they were 4th. Stoke have a lot further to go. Now two Burnley fans I know have both said I don't like watching their style of play. What next? Play as open as us? I don't think Dyche would go for that.

So I would suggest that even the top 26 will have several comings and goings in the next few years. And if we manage to stay in that elite, playing as we are, I for one will not complain.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...