Farke essentially got sacked for failing...

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

You cannot blame someone for not being enormously wealthy, and if you think that is reasonable, it says a lot about you. They have lived within their means, we as a society blame people and companies for excess spending that they cannot afford but expect it from football clubs... why? Football clubs should be following their lead, not the other way around.

And this is what is most frustrating about last season. We had an opportunity to prove you could survive in the EPL with a sensible, sustainable fiscal approach. A decent transfer window and we could have easily been competitive. 

Instead, we bought in Gilmour, Sargent, Rashica, Tzolis, Lees-Melou, Williams, Kabak, Normann and inexplicably, not a single proper CDM.

And then when, quelle surprise, it didn't work, we ditched a good manager and replaced him with a potato.

I can't think of anyone who ****ed up a season as much as Webber did last year. 

[hogesar 9,711]

39 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

And this is what is most frustrating about last season. We had an opportunity to prove you could survive in the EPL with a sensible, sustainable fiscal approach. A decent transfer window and we could have easily been competitive. 

Instead, we bought in Gilmour, Sargent, Rashica, Tzolis, Lees-Melou, Williams, Kabak, Normann and inexplicably, not a single proper CDM.

And then when, quelle surprise, it didn't work, we ditched a good manager and replaced him with a potato.

I can't think of anyone who ****ed up a season as much as Webber did last year. 

The problem is, we were so far from it last season. Like so, so far from it that I think it was clear that just signing a CDM and a couple of other somehow-magically-prem-quality players probably wouldn't have been enough either. 

All hindsight anyway, of course.

[Monty13 2,235]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

The problem is, we were so far from it last season. Like so, so far from it that I think it was clear that just signing a CDM and a couple of other somehow-magically-prem-quality players probably wouldn't have been enough either. 

All hindsight anyway, of course.

It wasn’t hindsight to think selling your best player, changing the entire way you play and buying/loaning only relegated, crocks and unproven potential talents was maybe not the best chance of survival.

I’m sure most of us hoped that the club knew what we were doing, on paper individually our signings looked ok, but I’m not sure who actually believed.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

The problem is, we were so far from it last season. Like so, so far from it that I think it was clear that just signing a CDM and a couple of other somehow-magically-prem-quality players probably wouldn't have been enough either. 

All hindsight anyway, of course.

Yes, but the fact before the summer transfer window opened, we had a squad that was 6 points and 10 points better than two of our Premier League rivals. The big spend was in part funded by player sales for sure, but that 60 odd million was pissed up the wall. Had it been spent better, and had the loan market been better used rather than wasted on a dog**** midfielder and a full-back who, whilst had a decent enough season, didn't massively improve on what we already had, we'd have made a far, far, far better stab at it than the limp garbage we served up.

We'd also have been far better placed this season in the event that it didn't keep us up.

Brentford's shrewd recruitment (combined with our abject transfer activity) turned them from a team 10 points worse than us into one that was 24 points better.

We got promoted from the Championship with a better squad than we had in the Premier League. I'm not sure that has ever happened before. Let that sink in, even factoring in the Buendia money, we went through a net spend of around £30 million TO MAKE THE SQUAD WORSE. Tory Prime Ministers aside, I don't think anyone has overseen such an abject failure whilst keeping their job.

[king canary 7,644]

3 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Yes, but the fact before the summer transfer window opened, we had a squad that was 6 points and 10 points better than two of our Premier League rivals. The big spend was in part funded by player sales for sure, but that 60 odd million was pissed up the wall. Had it been spent better, and had the loan market been better used rather than wasted on a dog**** midfielder and a full-back who, whilst had a decent enough season, didn't massively improve on what we already had, we'd have made a far, far, far better stab at it than the limp garbage we served up.

We'd also have been far better placed this season in the event that it didn't keep us up.

Brentford's shrewd recruitment (combined with our abject transfer activity) turned them from a team 10 points worse than us into one that was 24 points better.

We got promoted from the Championship with a better squad than we had in the Premier League. I'm not sure that has ever happened before. Let that sink in, even factoring in the Buendia money, we went through a net spend of around £30 million TO MAKE THE SQUAD WORSE. Tory Prime Ministers aside, I don't think anyone has overseen such an abject failure whilst keeping their job.

It is obviously 20/20 hindsight but it feels like the missed opportunity was the first time we went up. We had a young squad high on confidence playing without fear. I honestly believe a £30m transfer spend that season in two or three specific positions could have at least made us competitive. Instead we handed out new contracts to a bunch of players who hadn't proved they were good enough at Premier League level yet and added a couple of rubbish loanees and a crocked right back. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

4 minutes ago, king canary said:

It is obviously 20/20 hindsight but it feels like the missed opportunity was the first time we went up. We had a young squad high on confidence playing without fear. I honestly believe a £30m transfer spend that season in two or three specific positions could have at least made us competitive. Instead we handed out new contracts to a bunch of players who hadn't proved they were good enough at Premier League level yet and added a couple of rubbish loanees and a crocked right back. 

Possibly, but by not spending that season we were able to clear our debt and become properly sustainable. I completely understood the logic deployed. We put ourselves on a firm-footing and everything went to plan with the following Championship title. The plan then went south fast with an absolutely disastrous summer transfer window.

[hogesar 9,711]

32 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Yes, but the fact before the summer transfer window opened, we had a squad that was 6 points and 10 points better than two of our Premier League rivals. The big spend was in part funded by player sales for sure, but that 60 odd million was pissed up the wall. Had it been spent better, and had the loan market been better used rather than wasted on a dog**** midfielder and a full-back who, whilst had a decent enough season, didn't massively improve on what we already had, we'd have made a far, far, far better stab at it than the limp garbage we served up.

We'd also have been far better placed this season in the event that it didn't keep us up.

Brentford's shrewd recruitment (combined with our abject transfer activity) turned them from a team 10 points worse than us into one that was 24 points better.

We got promoted from the Championship with a better squad than we had in the Premier League. I'm not sure that has ever happened before. Let that sink in, even factoring in the Buendia money, we went through a net spend of around £30 million TO MAKE THE SQUAD WORSE. Tory Prime Ministers aside, I don't think anyone has overseen such an abject failure whilst keeping their job.

Well, Fulhams Sporting Director / Recruitment for starters. Circa £150 million spent in 2018 and many fans deemed the squad had been made worse. Then another £40 million the following season for the Championship, although they sold Sessegnon for £27 million. Then another £70 million for the Prem season, only to be relegated again.

They've finally got it right this time round but it's taken £300 million of spending to essentially get there. So our £60 million or net £30 million really isn't anything significant and then, rightly or wrongly, we signed younger players some of whom we're utilising still this season, so not a complete loss.

[hogesar 9,711]

55 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

It wasn’t hindsight to think selling your best player, changing the entire way you play and buying/loaning only relegated, crocks and unproven potential talents was maybe not the best chance of survival.

I’m sure most of us hoped that the club knew what we were doing, on paper individually our signings looked ok, but I’m not sure who actually believed.

Selling your best player is the only bit that wasn't hindsight in what you said. There was a general acknowledgement we had to do something a bit different from the last time, and you only have to look at the signing threads on this forum for how excited the fans were about Rashica, Tzolis, Normann, Kabak and even Gilmour.

So a lot of it is most definitely hindsight. 

[BigFish 1,988]

17 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

We got promoted from the Championship with a better squad than we had in the Premier League. I'm not sure that has ever happened before. Let that sink in, even factoring in the Buendia money, we went through a net spend of around £30 million TO MAKE THE SQUAD WORSE. Tory Prime Ministers aside, I don't think anyone has overseen such an abject failure whilst keeping their job.

That is true, but clearly not the intention. @Parma Ham's gone mouldy maintains we could have chosen to retain Buendia, but the probability was that would have still gone down. Imagine fan response to the counter factual that we retained Buendia, reduced our gross spend to £30m, spent £15m on Ajer, £15million on a CDM and still went down.

[canarydan23 4,060]

6 minutes ago, BigFish said:

That is true, but clearly not the intention. @Parma Ham's gone mouldy maintains we could have chosen to retain Buendia, but the probability was that would have still gone down. Imagine fan response to the counter factual that we retained Buendia, reduced our gross spend to £30m, spent £15m on Ajer, £15million on a CDM and still went down.

Add a couple of better loans to that list and I think we'd have been laughing.

Krul, Dimi, St.Juste/Bornauw/Ajer, Aarons, Andrich, Rupp/McLean/loanee, Buendia, Dowell, Cantwell, Pukki

Another attacking midfielder on loan, Onel as backup, I think we'd have had a real stab at staying up. And if we didn't, you sell Buendia and have a decent war-chest for another assault on the Championship.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

It is obviously 20/20 hindsight but it feels like the missed opportunity was the first time we went up. We had a young squad high on confidence playing without fear. I honestly believe a £30m transfer spend that season in two or three specific positions could have at least made us competitive. Instead we handed out new contracts to a bunch of players who hadn't proved they were good enough at Premier League level yet and added a couple of rubbish loanees and a crocked right back. 

As soon as the slogan "38 free hits" was broadcast I knew it would mean we weren't going to invest to stay up. It was just hope. Until lockdown, although struggling, I am sure we had enough there plus a couple of ambitious signings to stay up.

Lets be honest, have any of our signings since, been ambitious? Have they been the type of player we could have built around? Are Sara and Nunez outstanding in the Championship? Will either of them win EFL player of the year or even make it into the league side? 

[Monty13 2,235]

57 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Selling your best player is the only bit that wasn't hindsight in what you said. There was a general acknowledgement we had to do something a bit different from the last time, and you only have to look at the signing threads on this forum for how excited the fans were about Rashica, Tzolis, Normann, Kabak and even Gilmour.

So a lot of it is most definitely hindsight. 

New signings generate hype and more cautious optimism (especially our style signings) I’d say than a belief we are definitely doing everything right. We are supporters after all.

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Selling your best player is the only bit that wasn't hindsight in what you said. There was a general acknowledgement we had to do something a bit different from the last time, and you only have to look at the signing threads on this forum for how excited the fans were about Rashica, Tzolis, Normann, Kabak and even Gilmour.

So a lot of it is most definitely hindsight. 

To be honest, that is perpetually the case. I remember all those fancy-named signings under Peter Grant, to a man and woman we nearly all thought that was a great summer of recruitment with David Marshall who'd thwarted Barcelona in the Champions League between the sticks, Strihavka was going to be a Czech Dean Ashton and Julien Brellier was going to boss the midfield. Then when we signed Fotheringham people jizzed over a YouTube compilation and Andy Hughes was going to fire us to the Premier League.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,400]

4 hours ago, All the Germans said:

You cannot blame someone for not being enormously wealthy, and if you think that is reasonable, it says a lot about you. They have lived within their means, we as a society blame people and companies for excess spending that they cannot afford but expect it from football clubs... why? Football clubs should be following their lead, not the other way around.

Whose blaming them for not being enormously wealthy? The fault lay in refusing to even consider selling for the good of the club, as was admitted in a national newspaper. The owners held on too long and let other clubs sail passed us as our dated ownership model struggled to move us on to the next level. That isn’t a dig- I genuinely have a soft spot for the Smiths. But they should have sold five years ago in my opinion around the time of Farke’s first promotion. 

[nutty nigel 7,555]

Farke was absolutely unlucky 2019/20. We were still in with a chance when the pandemic hit. The fans were pretty much 100% with the team and manager (bar the usual nutters on here). We had won our last home game and had just won that cup tie at Spurs, which is still fondly remembered, and were looking forward to an FA Cup quarter final with Man Utd at Carrow Road. What a day that would have been! Packed out stadium with Wembley as the prize. Would have been amazing! Anyone remember it now? I had to look it up! We lost 2-1 at the end of June and all I remember was Todd's goal. I'm convinced we would have beaten them with the help of us fans. Farke would have been one game away from that FA Cup final that has eluded us for 120 years. We could have won it!

Nobody seems to be able to say what went wrong for project restart. But that team had more chance of staying up than the team 2 years later. 

 

[chicken 2,640]

On 15/03/2023 at 22:29, TeemuVanBasten said:

To keep this lot + Rupp + Lees Melou + Rashica off the bottom of the Premier League.

That's quite difficult to get your head around in hindsight isn't it.

Can't remember if Webber said that Farke had the 'tools' or had the 'weapons',  but it has made Webber look like a tool and a weapon.

We've had two seasons without a defensive midfielder (two respective sick notes on loan), and I'm not convinced that we currently have a Championship level left back on the books.

Is Webber really the man to embark on this rebuild? 

Lets just ignore that the head coach also has a say in signings. Lees-Melou was a player Farke wanted. We were atrocious in those first 10 games. Absolutely abysmal. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

56 minutes ago, chicken said:

Lets just ignore that the head coach also has a say in signings. Lees-Melou was a player Farke wanted. We were atrocious in those first 10 games. Absolutely abysmal. 

Nope. We were abysmal in some of the games. We were an absolute sitter away from taking all three points against Brighton, kept an away clean sheet at Burnley and were denied a point from each of the Arsenal and Leicester games by questionable referee decisions. We were heavily beaten by Man City and Liverpool, but were hardly in an exclusive club in that regard.

We were abysmal against Watford, Chelsea and Leeds.

[Monty13 2,235]

3 hours ago, BigFish said:

That is true, but clearly not the intention. @Parma Ham's gone mouldy maintains we could have chosen to retain Buendia, but the probability was that would have still gone down. Imagine fan response to the counter factual that we retained Buendia, reduced our gross spend to £30m, spent £15m on Ajer, £15million on a CDM and still went down.

It’s obviously purely conjecture but I think a) we would have been more competitive that season in that scenario b) therefore supporters would have been more forgiving.

We will obviously never know.

[BigFish 1,988]

3 hours ago, canarydan23 said:

Add a couple of better loans to that list and I think we'd have been laughing.

Krul, Dimi, St.Juste/Bornauw/Ajer, Aarons, Andrich, Rupp/McLean/loanee, Buendia, Dowell, Cantwell, Pukki

Another attacking midfielder on loan, Onel as backup, I think we'd have had a real stab at staying up. And if we didn't, you sell Buendia and have a decent war-chest for another assault on the Championship.

Maybe, but that is the joy of the counterfactual - we will never know> What we do know is what did happen and there is no argument about how successful that was.

[king canary 7,644]

3 hours ago, BigFish said:

That is true, but clearly not the intention. @Parma Ham's gone mouldy maintains we could have chosen to retain Buendia, but the probability was that would have still gone down. Imagine fan response to the counter factual that we retained Buendia, reduced our gross spend to £30m, spent £15m on Ajer, £15million on a CDM and still went down.

I'd also argue that this strategy, if it had failed, would probably have seen the ire directed more at the owners and less at Webber/Farke to be honest. 

Webber is hurt by the fact the headline figures show him spending a big budget by our standards and none of those players really working out.

When you actually dig into the spending though it shows that he probably only got to spend about £25-30m tops on improving what he already had- the rest was either money already committed to Gibson/Dimi or money generated by selling Buendia.

I think he made a hash of it and I do think he was put in a largely impossible position but I also think he chose the worst route available to him. 

[nutty nigel 7,555]

2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Whose blaming them for not being enormously wealthy? The fault lay in refusing to even consider selling for the good of the club, as was admitted in a national newspaper. The owners held on too long and let other clubs sail passed us as our dated ownership model struggled to move us on to the next level. That isn’t a dig- I genuinely have a soft spot for the Smiths. But they should have sold five years ago in my opinion around the time of Farke’s first promotion. 

"For the good of the club" begs the question... Who were they supposed to sell the club to?

A few other clubs have sailed past us whilst many more are envious of us.

This demand for other people's money never sits well with me. 

 

[chicken 2,640]

53 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Nope. We were abysmal in some of the games. We were an absolute sitter away from taking all three points against Brighton, kept an away clean sheet at Burnley and were denied a point from each of the Arsenal and Leicester games by questionable referee decisions. We were heavily beaten by Man City and Liverpool, but were hardly in an exclusive club in that regard.

We were abysmal against Watford, Chelsea and Leeds.

Grand. We were close to getting points, but we didn't, because we weren't good enough. We managed 5 points in 11 games. It was 2 in ten prior to his final win. 


If you think that run of results isn't abysmal then you'd have happily just taken relegation there and then. That's more than 1/3 of a premier league campaign with just two points to show. We'd played several teams we'd expect to be battling in a relegation fight. 5pts. Incredibly poor. 

[All the Germans 1,079]

2 hours ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Whose blaming them for not being enormously wealthy? The fault lay in refusing to even consider selling for the good of the club, as was admitted in a national newspaper. The owners held on too long and let other clubs sail passed us as our dated ownership model struggled to move us on to the next level. That isn’t a dig- I genuinely have a soft spot for the Smiths. But they should have sold five years ago in my opinion around the time of Farke’s first promotion. 

But you are still suggesting that someone bank rolls the club to live beyond it's means, spending more than it's income; why is that acceptable? A further question is, who would do that and was genuinely in it "for the good of the club"

What does "for the good of the club" mean? Should they accept dirty money like Newcastle, would that be fine for you? How about something the Glazers did with Man Utd and borrowed against the club; is that "for the good of the club"?

I am relatively certain that they would have (are going to?) sell to someone they believed could a) contribute more than they can and b) did not risk the future of the club. For that I am grateful. Do I wish they had more money and could make us more successful, yes but lets be honest, in a sensible business world, they would be considered to have performed very well, but in this instant success at all costs environment, they are attacked for essentially not being rich enough and not selling to some mythical entity that is rich enough and suitable.

Edited March 17, 2023 by All the Germans

[Robert N. LiM 4,432]

49 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

But you are still suggesting that someone bank rolls the club to live beyond it's means, spending more than it's income; why is that acceptable? A further question is, who would do that and was genuinely in it "for the good of the club"

What does "for the good of the club" mean? Should they accept dirty money like Newcastle, would that be fine for you? How about something the Glazers did with Man Utd and borrowed against the club; is that "for the good of the club"?

I am relatively certain that they would have (are going to?) sell to someone they believed could a) contribute more than they can and b) did not risk the future of the club. For that I am grateful. Do I wish they had more money and could make us more successful, yes but lets be honest, in a sensible business world, they would be considered to have performed very well, but in this instant success at all costs environment, they are attacked for essentially not being rich enough and not selling to some mythical entity that is rich enough and suitable.

Superbly well put, thank you

Edited March 17, 2023 by Robert N. LiM

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

3 hours ago, chicken said:

Lets just ignore that the head coach also has a say in signings. Lees-Melou was a player Farke wanted. We were atrocious in those first 10 games. Absolutely abysmal. 

Well he'll be the only one of the 7 permanent signings that summer that we'll break even on by the time they've all left the club, so I'm not sure that's as damning as you think. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[Mengo 825]

On 15/03/2023 at 19:42, Midlands Yellow said:

 

Webber’s out his depth, was clearly found after the second embarrassing failure in the top flight. I actually feel sorry for him now, he’s aged ten years since he’s been here and is probably questioning his own bullsh1t now. 

Out of his depth ✅️💥

Sacked farke.✅️💥

Tried for celebrity big Frank ( ✅️💥

Big Deano luckily becomes available✅️

That did not work ( why Stuart ) I thought you were a genius. You are a chancer that's without a doubt.

Last chance David Wagner  ( out of work ) and no compensation.  Yep if this works its all down to Wagner and his team. 

Ah but your committed now Stu since you went public about the chelsea and did not get it. Charlatan   con artist.  You've screwed Norwich City  ( easy money). Where are we , surely you have taken us backwards.  My next job won't be in football. ( well why did you want a job with Chelsea. You are a con man (in the same vain as notorious Mark Acklom.(imposter).

So how long is the projected project now?

Yep  , you have certainly ripped the piśh.

Mountebank 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Mengo

[chicken 2,640]

23 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Well he'll be the only one of the 7 permanent signings that summer that we'll break even on by the time they've all left the club, so I'm not sure that's as damning as you think. 

 Urrrghhh. Not what I said. I said that the recruitment isn't done solely by Webber, it's part of a team effort where the head coach, sporting director and chief scout etc all work together to identify targets.

I've said it before, but the best way to visualise it is like the end of the auditions on X-factor etc when they look at the groups and whittle down the candidates etc.

So the players would be sorted into their positions, then those involved would say which they would put at the top of the list. Obviously, they are all aware of budgets etc so that would also be a factor. Farke is as much a part of that as Webber.

As said many, many, many times before. Webber doesn't just randomly turn up at Colney to introduce a random new player that the head coach has never heard of before.

It's not like times gone by where a manager pretty much dictates it all on their own, equally, the sporting director doesn't build the squad etc.

I simply used Lees-Melou as the example because both Webber and Farke commented on it as being one that Farke had really wanted but that they thought was possibly out of our ability to land. 

Edited March 17, 2023 by chicken

[canarydan23 4,060]

2 hours ago, chicken said:

Grand. We were close to getting points, but we didn't, because we weren't good enough. We managed 5 points in 11 games. It was 2 in ten prior to his final win. 


If you think that run of results isn't abysmal then you'd have happily just taken relegation there and then. That's more than 1/3 of a premier league campaign with just two points to show. We'd played several teams we'd expect to be battling in a relegation fight. 5pts. Incredibly poor. 

You said absolutely abysmal. Absolutely means in all things. Now you're backtracking and saying it was just the results that were abysmal.

As I've explained, there was a lot more to it. I get that it doesn't fit into your narrative and you really struggle when presented with information that doesn't fit with your perspective, but that's on you, not me.

After his final win it was 5 in 5. A ppg that would have kept us up extrapolated over a season.  And three of those five were away.

Edited March 17, 2023 by canarydan23

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

You said absolutely abysmal. Absolutely means in all things. Now you're backtracking and saying it was just the results that were abysmal.

As I've explained, there was a lot more to it. I get that it doesn't fit into your narrative and you really struggle when presented with information that doesn't fit with your perspective, but that's on you, not me.

After his final win it was 5 in 5. A ppg that would have kept us up extrapolated over a season.  And three of those five were away.

It was the heavy home defeat to Watford which ultimately cost Farke his job I feel. It was a terrible result.

Leeds at home was the fixture that he really needed to make amends for that loss, and we were poor in that game. 

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[Ulfotto 640]

I feel the reason that frustration lingers regarding the sacking of Farke is that the nagging doubt that somewhere in his reign there was a team and spirit which could have not only stayed up in the premier league but could have done really well.

The frustration is that that we never got to see that.