Sheffield United v Arsenal

[Rupethebear 7]

The football model is bust unless you have a multimillion pound backer.

The problem is if you go up you’re guaranteed one season so you can’t build a business model or sign any decent players other than foreign mercenaries on loan or top young talent from the Premier League.

This is where the issue is, by signing top kids on loan all you are effectively doing is making the bigger clubs bigger and developing their players faster!

if it was my game I’d ban loan signings, doesn’t happen in any other industry, imagine HSBC lend Barclays their young talent.

The game is broken time for a radical change.

[Old Shuck 185]

53 minutes ago, Rupethebear said:

The football model is bust unless you have a multimillion pound backer.

The problem is if you go up you’re guaranteed one season so you can’t build a business model or sign any decent players other than foreign mercenaries on loan or top young talent from the Premier League.

This is where the issue is, by signing top kids on loan all you are effectively doing is making the bigger clubs bigger and developing their players faster!

if it was my game I’d ban loan signings, doesn’t happen in any other industry, imagine HSBC lend Barclays their young talent.

The game is broken time for a radical change.

The Premier League will, ultimately, and by 2030, become a closed shop, no promotion or relegation, 18 clubs (they'll be hoping to weed out the Luton's and Bournemouth's for a spot of Leeds and Sunderland) with most of them playing in European competition of some kind as well as some fixtures played overseas. They won't compete in either of the domestic cups.

The fact that the promoted clubs tend to struggle is all the fuel they need to justify this happening and the formation of a 80 team separate football competition of four divisions operating underneath, but not part of it.

One league for worldwide sofa dwelling consumers paying £24.99 a month, four more for football fans who'll, through the greed of the perceived elite, get a little bit of the game they used to love back.

Until, I guess, the top ones in that league start to get greedy....

Edited March 5 by Old Shuck

[ROBFLECK 132]

6 minutes ago, Old Shuck said:

Until, I guess, the top ones in that league start to get greedy....

That's the point , but how far could it still go then ?  The money involved now is already mind boggling.

[Ernie Wise 67]

57 minutes ago, Rupethebear said:

The football model is bust unless you have a multimillion pound backer.

The problem is if you go up you’re guaranteed one season so you can’t build a business model or sign any decent players other than foreign mercenaries on loan or top young talent from the Premier League.

This is where the issue is, by signing top kids on loan all you are effectively doing is making the bigger clubs bigger and developing their players faster!

if it was my game I’d ban loan signings, doesn’t happen in any other industry, imagine HSBC lend Barclays their young talent.

The game is broken time for a radical change.

Absolutely!

The ‘biggest’ clubs want it all, so let them have it?

Tell them to go and get lost in a Super (?) League. But they want the money grabbers league money, the ‘We ruined football for our own benefit’ (Sky) money, money from anywhere in the world irrespective of how dirty it is. 
It all started in prehistoric times ie before 1992 when they stopped sharing gate money from league games and has been a steady creep, creep to a point where they want to control the game completely. 
 
It’s time the rest of the Money league stopped just hanging around for the money, with no chance of winning the league to say enough is enough and form a united front with the other 72 clubs against the greedy and stop their relentless efforts to stop true competition.

But they won’t because they’re getting their minority share.

[Icecream Snow 761]

Looks like Sheffield United will end up breaking a few unwanted records.

Currently they've conceded 42 goals at home in 14 games, Watford have the record with 46.

With 72 conceded from 27 games, Derby's 89 for the season (38 games) and Swindon's 100 (from 42 games) are under threat. 

[BroadstairsR 2,188]

3 minutes ago, Icecream Snow said:

Looks like Sheffield United will end up breaking a few unwanted records.

 

One record they won't break (hopefully):-

"The record for the biggest win is Manchester United's 9–0 victory against Ipswich Town at Old Trafford on 4 March 1995. Leicester City are the only other side to have scored 9 goals in  the Premier League, they won 9-0 against Southampton."

Te, he.

 

 

 

[Nexus_Canary 1,024]

This is one of the reasons I have struggled to enjoy watching Norwich this year.

What are we playing for? A grand tonking and national humiliation - only to come back to the champ.

Everyone banging on about being able to make it in the Prem is quite honestly delusional and a bit stupid. 

[king canary 7,644]

1 hour ago, Old Shuck said:

The Premier League will, ultimately, and by 2030, become a closed shop, no promotion or relegation, 18 clubs (they'll be hoping to weed out the Luton's and Bournemouth's for a spot of Leeds and Sunderland) with most of them playing in European competition of some kind as well as some fixtures played overseas. They won't compete in either of the domestic cups.

I don't see it happening like this- I think it would be more likely you get the Championship breaking away from the rest of the league and you have a closed shop across two leagues of 20 or 18 each.

There is no money to be made from a TV rights perspective by removing the excitement of a relegation battle in exchange for guaranteeing you get to see Leeds v Wolves twice a year. 

[hogesar 9,711]

Burnley and us showing you can't play good football and stay up. They've spent £100 million. That is net spend. They could end up with less points than us.

Sheffield United showing you can't play bad football and stay up. They spent £60 million odd. I think in terms of net spend it's more like £35 million. They could end up with less points than us.

It should ring alarm bells but most fans answer is "get rich owners, spend more money". It's a concern.

Should also be time for some reflection on how hard it is now. Rather than kicking Webber into touch, ditching Farke etc there needs to be some realisation what we're fighting against.

Whilst we dissected and roundly criticised every signing into the ground (after the event) there has to be some realisation that Gilmour is playing in a Premier League side (his effectiveness debatable but he is) - Rashica is doing well in Europe, Kabak is doing a decent job for a team pushing top 6 in the Bundesliga, Pierre-Lees Melou is being touted for a France National Team call up, and our entire season is reliant upon Josh Sargent and Angus Gunn remaining fit right now.

The catch is, the only vague possibility we have of achieving any sort of Premier League holiday of more than one season is to regularly get promoted to it in the first place. Partially why I'm still astounded how easily people accepted Idah going out on loan and us getting a non-match fit, unsuitable looking option in as a replacement. I assume the response would have been hugely different had Webber still been in charge, or if fans still believed that Knapper was on 24/7 line with Webber and doing exactly what he said at all times.

 

 

 

 

[shefcanary 2,435]

Well, what can I say. I'm nursing a hangover this morning because (and this is interesting given the debate on another thread here about season ticket holders not attending matches at the Carra') a Blades friend of mine gave me his ticket because he couldn't make it as a result of the scheduling of the match. Why a hangover? Well when the 3rd went in, my other Blades friends I was sat with said "**** this, let's go!" and we headed for a nearby trendy Scando bar and then preceded to get hammered as they acknowledged they really have ****ed this season up big time.

In their (agreed very poor) defence, Heckingbottom and Wilder were only given a net £20m to play with on squad building, nearly all their centre backs have been out injured for long periods, and they have lots of good ball playing midfielders without any of them having any sort of physical characteristics (even the tall Brazilian Souza who has zero presence). How I recounted how we were treated in our recent appearances at this level, but that just made the drinks flow faster. 

Anyway, memo to self - next time offered a seat at Bramall Lane, make sure you stay and watch the whole game to avoid a hangover. 

[Old Shuck 185]

45 minutes ago, king canary said:

I don't see it happening like this- I think it would be more likely you get the Championship breaking away from the rest of the league and you have a closed shop across two leagues of 20 or 18 each.

There is no money to be made from a TV rights perspective by removing the excitement of a relegation battle in exchange for guaranteeing you get to see Leeds v Wolves twice a year. 

And there's the rub-when the future of any kind of football is dependent on TV interest and rights. Where would the game be without it-and where would most clubs, ourselves included, now be without it?

TV owns the game and the medium acts like it. It was Keith Burkinshaw, who agreed with a journalists comment about Tottenham ('...there used to be a football club over there' -and that was in 1984!) who also said TV would one day govern the game to such an extent that fans would be paid to attend games in order to provide the atmosphere for the TV coverage.

As it turns out, VAR is the great entertainer for the sofa dwelling masses right now but that day might still come once true fans are fed up with Liverpool vs Inter Milan for the 7th time in a year....

[Robert N. LiM 4,432]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Should also be time for some reflection on how hard it is now. Rather than kicking Webber into touch, ditching Farke etc there needs to be some realisation what we're fighting against.

I really think that should we go up this season (or any time soon), we need to be absolutely committed to ignoring the noise, doing what is right for the club and not giving a single shiny shıt what anyone else thinks of us.

[hogesar 9,711]

10 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

I really think that should we go up this season (or any time soon), we need to be absolutely committed to ignoring the noise, doing what is right for the club and not giving a single shiny shıt what anyone else thinks of us.

I agree but I can't see it happening.

There were fans on here starting endless threads about how Talksport were right, we were a disgrace, deserve to go down.

There was a decent number who wanted us to give back the parachute money to "learn our lesson"

Absolutely mental!

[king canary 7,644]

21 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

I really think that should we go up this season (or any time soon), we need to be absolutely committed to ignoring the noise, doing what is right for the club and not giving a single shiny shıt what anyone else thinks of us.

Doing what is right for the club is trying to stay up though.

That doesn't mean refusing to sign anyone while giving a bunch of unproven players top flight contracts, nor does it mean chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them.

As much as people want it to be, our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise or the fans or talksport or whoever- it has been poor execution from those in charge. 

[Robert N. LiM 4,432]

1 hour ago, shefcanary said:

Anyway, memo to self - next time offered a seat at Bramall Lane, make sure you stay and watch the whole game to avoid a hangover. 

Think you're learning the wrong lesson here. Next time don't go to the first 15 minutes of the game, just proceed directly to the trendy Scando bar.

[Robert N. LiM 4,432]

35 minutes ago, king canary said:

Doing what is right for the club is trying to stay up though.

That doesn't mean refusing to sign anyone while giving a bunch of unproven players top flight contracts, nor does it mean chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them.

As much as people want it to be, our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise or the fans or talksport or whoever- it has been poor execution from those in charge. 

Absolutely take the points you make there, and certainly wasn't intending to absolve those responsible from their mistakes. But I think saying 'our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise' takes it a bit too far. You don't give your head coach a four-year contract then sack him 10 games later if you're thinking clearly. Even 'chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them' reeks to me of showing those critics 'see, we are spending money'.

Completely agree that 'what is right for the club is trying to stay up' - but you also have to accept that you might fail. Luton have been absolutely brilliant this season, shaming our efforts, but they may well still go down, and you have to be able to cope with that. I don't really get the financials, but my understanding of it is that without Attanasio's arrival we would have been seriously screwed as a result of spending money we didn't really have in the summer of 2021.

 

[this next bit is more general musing than specifically a reply to you, @king canary]

 

I guess what it comes down to from my point of view is that the way top-level football currently works in this country is ridiculous, bordering on outright immoral in some cases, and there is far too little attention paid to that, partly because the media that should be reporting on the Premier League is actually just its promotional arm. So you're stuck in this difficult position where you obviously want to be in the highest possible league, but getting and staying there involves you playing a game that is very difficult to play, highly risky and extremely difficult to justify ethically. One of the things that I really value about our club is that have tried to do things differently. I recognise we failed, and that the arrival of Attanasio represents to me a just-about-acceptable concession to what is required to be competitive at the top level. But I'm just not prepared to accept the dominant narrative that there should be an endless arms race of escalating transfer fees and wages, clubs spending way more than they can afford, becoming reliant on distant (and in some case literally murderous) investors, and that any club not playing that game should somehow be ashamed of itself. I love NCFC, I love football, but I really want no part of how modern football works, and the cognitive dissonance of that is pretty hard to manage.

Edited March 5 by Robert N. LiM
corrected the date

[sgncfc 1,235]

Our biggest mistake in our last two attempts at the PL was hugely overpaying our players. By all means reward success but laying out 80% of the TV money on wages was and will always be ridiculous - all it does is underline the enormous quality gap and leave clubs in trouble.

If survival and another £100m is truly our only aim we need to establish why that is the case. Just so we can give it to the players yet again?

In every other walk of life you get paid more by being better at your job; by taking more responsibility; by doing things more efficiently. But our players just got increases for being the same. Very few of them improved - even Buendia struggled at PL level with us.

If, and it's a huge if, we manage to scrape up this season, I'd really like us to just pay the promotion bonuses and keep salaries at a more modest level. Players and agents who don't like it can move on for the right fee and we can play some kids and others who want to be here - let's be honest, our results will be no worse.

The playoff system is fun but expecting a team finishing 6th in the Championship to have any chance of survival in the EPL is nonsensical.

[hogesar 9,711]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Doing what is right for the club is trying to stay up though.

That doesn't mean refusing to sign anyone while giving a bunch of unproven players top flight contracts, nor does it mean chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them.

As much as people want it to be, our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise or the fans or talksport or whoever- it has been poor execution from those in charge. 

See, but if you fail, one of those will always be true in the eyes of fans.

Even though it's quite clear the club always had a pretty methodical way of working with a lot of investment in scouting, recruitment, data and youth - so I'd argue there was a plan of how to use the players. It just didn't work. That's hardly surprising, it'll probably happen 2 out of every 3 times for a club getting promoted and net-spending £35 million. 

[king canary 7,644]

1 hour ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Absolutely take the points you make there, and certainly wasn't intending to absolve those responsible from their mistakes. But I think saying 'our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise' takes it a bit too far. You don't give your head coach a four-year contract then sack him 10 games later if you're thinking clearly. Even 'chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them' reeks to me of showing those critics 'see, we are spending money'.

I don't personally believe that showing talksport they were wrong factored into our transfer strategy one bit. We were always going to try and spend to an extent. We were told in part that we didn't spent that first season because we felt we could bounce back and that money would help us the second season. 

I don't hugely disagree with your general musings but I'm afraid I don't see football changing any time soon so I'm in the 'can't beat them, join them' camp.

[king canary 7,644]

23 minutes ago, hogesar said:

See, but if you fail, one of those will always be true in the eyes of fans.

Even though it's quite clear the club always had a pretty methodical way of working with a lot of investment in scouting, recruitment, data and youth - so I'd argue there was a plan of how to use the players. It just didn't work. That's hardly surprising, it'll probably happen 2 out of every 3 times for a club getting promoted and net-spending £35 million. 

I've made this point to you but you massively underplay just how **** those two seasons were.

Yes lots of newly promoted teams get relegated. Usually though they don't fail as badly as we did. 

If your 'methodical way of working' results in 43 points from 76 games then I'd suggest it is not very good and it isn't the fans fault for pointing that out.

[RobJames 883]

1 hour ago, king canary said:

Doing what is right for the club is trying to stay up though.

That doesn't mean refusing to sign anyone while giving a bunch of unproven players top flight contracts, nor does it mean chucking millions at the wall to sign 7 or 8 players with no sensible plan of how to use them.

As much as people want it to be, our failures have been nothing to do with listening to the noise or the fans or talksport or whoever- it has been poor execution from those in charge. 

Whereas the club was not trying to stay up ?

It is a balancing act, do you go sh it or bust or be aware that if relegated you have the wherewithal to come back - something a dozen or so ex PL clubs have failed to do, mostly by following that suicidal sh it bust idiocy

"poor execution from those in charge. "

Absolute rubbish.There is no guarantee when signing players  see Man Utd. And no guarantee when throwing money at it either see Forest. For our relative size and funding we have been relatively successful over the past decade or so, Unfortunately it has sucked in a number f whiners who believe that we have a right to be in the PL and when not so, it must be down to some sort of pantomime villain, wicked board doing down the fans etc.

The massive gulf between the PL and the championship is now almost unsurmountable, or are you going to tell us that Luton, Burnley, and Sheff Utd are at the bottom because of " poor execution from those in charge". Was the relegation of Leeds, Leicester and Southampton down to "poor execution from those in charge". If not, then what wis the explanation ?

[repman 635]

I still maintain that we won't stay up unless we manage to find ourselves a top coach who will be able to get a group playing above their perceived level. I don't think we've had that in our last 2 PL seasons, generally I'd say this was down to Webber not putting as much stock into the value of a head coach as I would. Even then, after it became clear Farke wasn't going to work the second time around, if your only options are between Dean Smith and Frank Lampard then you're as good as done for already.

Realistically the only way we will get a really top coach in is by hiring them in the championship and going on that journey with them, it's what we hoped for with Farke. It's why I always said we should go for Russell Martin, but anyone in that mould fits. Part of our model is that we will have players who go on to play for bigger clubs, that should apply to the manager role too. 

[hogesar 9,711]

9 minutes ago, king canary said:

I've made this point to you but you massively underplay just how **** those two seasons were.

Yes lots of newly promoted teams get relegated. Usually though they don't fail as badly as we did. 

If your 'methodical way of working' results in 43 points from 76 games then I'd suggest it is not very good and it isn't the fans fault for pointing that out.

Of course they were terrible seasons but as we're seeing more frequently, it's becoming the norm for promoted clubs. Even those spending over £100 mill net like Burnley

[king canary 7,644]

7 minutes ago, RobJames said:

The massive gulf between the PL and the championship is now almost unsurmountable, or are you going to tell us that Luton, Burnley, and Sheff Utd are at the bottom because of " poor execution from those in charge". Was the relegation of Leeds, Leicester and Southampton down to "poor execution from those in charge". If not, then what wis the explanation ?

Apart from Luton (who are overachieving by anyone's expectations), yes, that is what I'd say.

It isn't just that but it plays a large part, certainly for Leicester and Southampton. 

[king canary 7,644]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Of course they were terrible seasons but as we're seeing more frequently, it's becoming the norm for promoted clubs. Even those spending over £100 mill net like Burnley

Becoming the norm? Is it? This season seems particularly bad for promoted clubs but outside of that it is only us who've **** the bed quite so spectacularly in recent years. Last season all 3 promoted clubs stayed up. 

 

[ROBFLECK 132]

5 minutes ago, repman said:

I still maintain that we won't stay up unless we manage to find ourselves a top coach who will be able to get a group playing above their perceived level. I don't think we've had that in our last 2 PL seasons, generally I'd say this was down to Webber not putting as much stock into the value of a head coach as I would. Even then, after it became clear Farke wasn't going to work the second time around, if your only options are between Dean Smith and Frank Lampard then you're as good as done for already.

Realistically the only way we will get a really top coach in is by hiring them in the championship and going on that journey with them, it's what we hoped for with Farke. It's why I always said we should go for Russell Martin, but anyone in that mould fits. Part of our model is that we will have players who go on to play for bigger clubs, that should apply to the manager role too. 

I have to agree with this , a manager is crucial for the chances of survival. Someone like Thomas Frank at Brentford or even Rob Edwards at Luton have had an enormous impact on the survival chances of their respective clubs. I know Luton are still favourites to be relegated too, but Edwards has done a fantastic job there on a shoestring budget .  With a manager that could bring the very best out of our current squad, I think we would be a place or two higher in the league...

[RobJames 883]

Yes, I see Brentford are riding high

And you give the game away by talking f survival,whereas  at least a dozen ex PL clubs below us show what 'giving it a go' inevitably ends with. That so many fail should give you a clue, but it does not.

I would like some evidence that S'oton and Leics relegation was caused by what we are supposed to have done - "poor execution from those in charge". Does that charge apply to WBA and Watford ?

[king canary 7,644]

22 minutes ago, RobJames said:

Yes, I see Brentford are riding high

And you give the game away by talking f survival,whereas  at least a dozen ex PL clubs below us show what 'giving it a go' inevitably ends with. That so many fail should give you a clue, but it does not.

I would like some evidence that S'oton and Leics relegation was caused by what we are supposed to have done - "poor execution from those in charge". Does that charge apply to WBA and Watford ?

Yes? How is this a remotely controversial opinion? What do you think caused Leicester to be relegated?

[hogesar 9,711]

40 minutes ago, king canary said:

Becoming the norm? Is it? This season seems particularly bad for promoted clubs but outside of that it is only us who've **** the bed quite so spectacularly in recent years. Last season all 3 promoted clubs stayed up. 

 

I think it's most certainly a sign of things to come, if we're looking at trends

We have Luton on 20 points, two teams on 13 points right now.

Last season Southampton only getting 25 points from a squad that had seen over £200 million of investment over the summer and previous season.

Us sh*tting the bed like you say with 22 points, but Watford only getting 23.

Sheffield United on 23 points the season before, West Brom only 26. None of the bottom 3 reaching 30 let alone 40 points.

Maybe it won't be the case and this next season might be a slight exception in that Leeds and Leicester genuinely have some Premier League quality players already, and are larger clubs that probably shouldn't be in the Championship anyway.

But I suspect we'll see the 20-25 point relegation zone as a standard moving forwards.

 

 

[king canary 7,644]

3 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I think it's most certainly a sign of things to come, if we're looking at trends

We have Luton on 20 points, two teams on 13 points right now.

Last season Southampton only getting 25 points from a squad that had seen over £200 million of investment over the summer and previous season.

Us sh*tting the bed like you say with 22 points, but Watford only getting 23.

Sheffield United on 23 points the season before, West Brom only 26. None of the bottom 3 reaching 30 let alone 40 points.

Maybe it won't be the case and this next season might be a slight exception in that Leeds and Leicester genuinely have some Premier League quality players already, and are larger clubs that probably shouldn't be in the Championship anyway.

But I suspect we'll see the 20-25 point relegation zone as a standard moving forwards.

 

 

You're muddying the waters somewhat- a number of those clubs you mention weren't promoted clubs like originally mentioned.

I take your point that we're seeing the very bottom of the league get lower points totals than before. However that doesn't change my opinion that we did a remarkably **** job those two seasons.