Russ Martin Farke in disguise

[Up and Away 91]

11 hours ago, Up and Away said:

The difference in player physicality and athleticism between the PL and the Champ is huge, let alone technical ability.  It makes it so hard for promoted sides to compete, you need to pretty much upgrade your entire starting XI just to have a chance of staying up. 

 

By coincidence this popped up on my feed this morning.  A club by club guide to the PL transfer window from Swiss Ramble (who writes about football finances).  To add to my point about promoted clubs needing to spend heavily to compete. The last paragraph is quite stark and shows how challenging it is to get into the PL and stay there.

 

Ipswich Town

Ipswich have been out of England’s top flight for 22 years, so they really had some catching up to do with their squad after winning back-to-back promotions from League One and the Championship.

Many analysts bang on about the revenue boost if a club reaches the Premier League, but there is also a price to pay, as promoted clubs need to spend if they want to be competitive.

This meant that Ipswich spent £129m, more than four times as much as the previous 10 years combined. They only sold £2m, so their net spend was a staggering £127m, which was the second highest in the Premier League – and indeed the third highest in the world.

There wasn’t really one big money acquisition, but eight players arrived for €10m or more, the largest purchases being Omari Hutchinson from Chelsea, Jacob Greaves from Hull City, Liam Delap from Manchester City and Jack Clarke from Sunderland.

Their £147m gross spend over the last five years is by some distance the smallest of the clubs playing in the Premier League this season, less than half of Leicester City and Everton, who had £321m apiece.

 

[aBee 176]

13 hours ago, hogesar said:

Farke had a say in every signing.

That Farke has changed a considerable amount even at this level with Leeds tells you even he didn't believe his Norwich style could work, especially after failure in Germany and further failure last season.

Yes, it’s notable that after their 3-3 on the opening day and being hammered by Boro in the League Cup Farke has made a point of getting Leeds to fight very hard for clean sheets. 
 

I was at the game v Southampton and despite the scoreline and the very clear analysis on MotD could see there being potential hope for Martin’s approach. I think Armstrong and Brereton are not really good enough to score enough for them but otherwise the tweaks they need are coachable. 
 

Passing out from the back is fine as long as there’s an openness to a longer ball out when (as with the first two goals) all 5-6 defensive players in your own half are being pressed hard. That relies on the attacking players moving and positioning to receive a longer ball. They also need themselves to be coached to press harder so a long ball doesn’t just get turned over to give away possession. I think it’s doable and the tactical switch Martin made to win the play off final suggests he’s not quite as rigid as he sounded in his post-match interview. 

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

1 hour ago, Up and Away said:

By coincidence this popped up on my feed this morning.  A club by club guide to the PL transfer window from Swiss Ramble (who writes about football finances).  To add to my point about promoted clubs needing to spend heavily to compete. The last paragraph is quite stark and shows how challenging it is to get into the PL and stay there.

Wow, yes, that's pretty shocking when laid out like that. To my untrained eye it makes the dilemma basically "break PSR rules or get relegated. Or both."

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

14 hours ago, chicken said:

Lambert was pretty flexible in his approach to games, it's an element of why we did well with him in the premier league.

It was Lambert I had in mind when I asked @Parma Ham's gone mouldy if a coach could be a weapon. My memory of our PL season under him was that he picked a different XI for more or less every game, as if he thought that player-for-player we were almost always going to be weaker than the opposition, but that if he got his tactical plan spot on for that game, we could compete. At the time, I thought it was a bit self-indulgent. But given that that was the only time since relegation in 1995 that we didn't spend a PL season in a relegation battle, it clearly worked. Times have changed since then, obviously.

[Danke bitte 1,147]

9 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

It was Lambert I had in mind when I asked @Parma Ham's gone mouldy if a coach could be a weapon. My memory of our PL season under him was that he picked a different XI for more or less every game, as if he thought that player-for-player we were almost always going to be weaker than the opposition, but that if he got his tactical plan spot on for that game, we could compete. At the time, I thought it was a bit self-indulgent. But given that that was the only time since relegation in 1995 that we didn't spend a PL season in a relegation battle, it clearly worked. Times have changed since then, obviously.

Do you think our Sliding Doors Prem relationship moment then was that ill fated second season under Hughton - specifically buying a striker that didn’t fit the set up.

Had we not slept walked into relegation that season makes me wonder if we could have built from it. Because since then we’ve had little luck in staying up and things have changed drastically in the Prem landscape. To me, that was our last real chance to make a fist of things

[hogesar 10,713]

18 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

It was Lambert I had in mind when I asked @Parma Ham's gone mouldy if a coach could be a weapon. My memory of our PL season under him was that he picked a different XI for more or less every game, as if he thought that player-for-player we were almost always going to be weaker than the opposition, but that if he got his tactical plan spot on for that game, we could compete. At the time, I thought it was a bit self-indulgent. But given that that was the only time since relegation in 1995 that we didn't spend a PL season in a relegation battle, it clearly worked. Times have changed since then, obviously.

Lambert was a bit more pragmatic than most people realise. We scored some good goals in the Prem but actually, we played more long balls than any other team that season. We had a genuinely two-footed winger in Pilkington which is oddly still unusual, and a Holt who was physical and horrible to play again who would run channels all game (to cries of fans asking why he wasn't in the middle, but there we go).

We knew we weren't good enough to play through teams but if we could get it "up the other end" quickly, Holt and Morison were both difficult for defenders despite not being quick and if they could knock the ball down to a Wes then we had someone who could genuinely dribble past someone in the prem and open up opportunities.

[Mengo 850]

51 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Lambert was a bit more pragmatic than most people realise. We scored some good goals in the Prem but actually, we played more long balls than any other team that season. We had a genuinely two-footed winger in Pilkington which is oddly still unusual, and a Holt who was physical and horrible to play again who would run channels all game (to cries of fans asking why he wasn't in the middle, but there we go).

We knew we weren't good enough to play through teams but if we could get it "up the other end" quickly, Holt and Morison were both difficult for defenders despite not being quick and if they could knock the ball down to a Wes then we had someone who could genuinely dribble past someone in the prem and open up opportunities.

The Lambert era The Glasgow gangster. A good time for Norwich  City. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🎯💯

[littleyellowbirdie 3,128]

1 hour ago, hogesar said:

Lambert was a bit more pragmatic than most people realise. We scored some good goals in the Prem but actually, we played more long balls than any other team that season. We had a genuinely two-footed winger in Pilkington which is oddly still unusual, and a Holt who was physical and horrible to play again who would run channels all game (to cries of fans asking why he wasn't in the middle, but there we go).

We knew we weren't good enough to play through teams but if we could get it "up the other end" quickly, Holt and Morison were both difficult for defenders despite not being quick and if they could knock the ball down to a Wes then we had someone who could genuinely dribble past someone in the prem and open up opportunities.

If I remember correctly, he regularly used to change the setup of the players according to who we were playing as well. 

[Big Vince 420]

55 minutes ago, Mengo said:

The Lambert era The Glasgow gangster. A good time for Norwich  City. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🎯💯

It had more to do with Culverhouse and Karsa. Lambert was the front man.

[Big Vince 420]

18 hours ago, Capt. Pants said:

I hope Martin's Plan A works. I like him and Southampton are easy on the eye. Not only that but if they survive it's a fair chance Ipswich won't.

I hate Russell Martin. Biggest hypocrite alive. Lost on purpose in that 0-5 vs Brighton.

[shefcanary 2,940]

6 hours ago, Up and Away said:

Their £147m gross spend over the last five years is by some distance the smallest of the clubs playing in the Premier League this season, less than half of Leicester City and Everton, who had £321m apiece.

Any idea what our previous five year equivalent was when we got up their last time - I'm sure it would be even less than £100m?

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

5 hours ago, Danke bitte said:

Do you think our Sliding Doors Prem relationship moment then was that ill fated second season under Hughton - specifically buying a striker that didn’t fit the set up.

Had we not slept walked into relegation that season makes me wonder if we could have built from it. Because since then we’ve had little luck in staying up and things have changed drastically in the Prem landscape. To me, that was our last real chance to make a fist of things

Up to a point. I think that we have to recognise that with our limited finances, any PL existence is always going to be precarious - you're only ever an injury crisis away from getting dragged into a relegation fight even if you see yourself as an 'established' Prem team.

But I do quite often think of Brighton's sensational decision to sack Hughton after a perfectly respectable season, and get Graham Potter in as his replacement. They haven't looked back since. Obviously they have a lot more financial muscle, but it does make me think of what might have been had we had the courage (and the money) to do similar.

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

4 hours ago, hogesar said:

We scored some good goals in the Prem but actually, we played more long balls than any other team that season.

We were very direct in the Champs under Lambert, too, iirc. A reminder that exciting football doesn't always mean Farkeball (though that style does remain my favourite)

[Up and Away 91]

52 minutes ago, shefcanary said:

Any idea what our previous five year equivalent was when we got up their last time - I'm sure it would be even less than £100m?

Not off hand, but pretty sure you are right. That said, my instinct is that transfer fees have jumped considerably over recent seasons, especially with young talent player trading, so a like for like comparison may not be helpful.

I suspect more germane, albeit rhetorical, is the question whether the club spent enough last time it was promoted to give themselves a fighting chance?

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

8 minutes ago, Up and Away said:

I suspect more germane, albeit rhetorical, is the question whether the club spent enough last time it was promoted to give themselves a fighting chance?

Given how badly we spent the money we did spend, I think it's a moot point. Though I guess if we'd had more money we might have been able to buy (and pay) Andrich, Ajer, etc.

Edited September 3 by Robert N. LiM

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

3 minutes ago, Robert N. LiM said:

Given how badly we spent the money we did spend, I think it's a moot point. Though I guess if we'd had more money we might have been able to buy (and pay) Andrich, Ajer, etc.

Knapper reminds me of Webber (in the good days) totally focused and in parts ruthless. As long as he doesn’t want to climb hills and get distracted I think we have a winner here. 

[non-scoring strikers 153]

32 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Knapper reminds me of Webber (in the good days) totally focused and in parts ruthless. As long as he doesn’t want to climb hills and get distracted I think we have a winner here. 

Knapper is the complete opposite of Webber. He's measured, calm and gets excellent deals on both incoming and outgoing transfers.

Most importantly he's not a narcissist.

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

2 minutes ago, non-scoring strikers said:

Knapper is the complete opposite of Webber. He's measured, calm and gets excellent deals on both incoming and outgoing transfers.

Most importantly he's not a narcissist.

Webber was magnificent for a few seasons, showed his true colours soon after and as you say was a narcissist. 

Edited September 3 by Midlands Yellow

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,256]

There's nothing inherently flawed by that playing style itself, all playing styles have their advantages and disadvantages and you could argue that positional possession based play is in theory the most likely to produce results over a longer term if you take players making any mistakes out. 

The reason why people say teams who have been promoted or are very weak quality-wise for their league shouldn't play it is much more about the types of players you can afford. Man City can afford technically superb footballers with elite level athleticism, fitness and pace and tactical awareness. If we want to play that way in the PL then we'll need players who are at least technically very good but to get players of that level with our budget we're sacrificing on the physical and mental side which makes us incredibly easy to play against and makes the system look more flawed than it would be on an even playing field. This is exacerbated by what the teams from 7th to 17th are doing where most play counter attacking football with technically good but physically and mentally exceptional players and the ones that don't have done extremely well at recruitment with budgets that dwarf ours and that of other promoted teams. 

What we need to do is what we're doing now. Trying to employ a possession centred but still in some ways flexible playing style with bigger more physically dominant players who can just about play this style technically and hope we unearth a couple of young players in important positions who will develop into good PL players and get lucky one season if we go up. If we try the Farke route again of going all in on technical quality and possession at all costs it'll fail, if we go the other route like Luton/ Sheff Utd did and try to play on the counter with bigger faster players who are strong off the ball not only will it make it harder to get promoted in the first place we'll still be at a disadvantage because other teams could afford better players in that style, the fans would also be unhappy and it would make bouncing back from a relegation harder. I think given all the options the approach we're taking now on paper at least looks like the best option but the odds of us staying up when we get promoted again are still fairly remote and would be no matter how we play. 

[chicken 3,079]

7 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

It was Lambert I had in mind when I asked @Parma Ham's gone mouldy if a coach could be a weapon. My memory of our PL season under him was that he picked a different XI for more or less every game, as if he thought that player-for-player we were almost always going to be weaker than the opposition, but that if he got his tactical plan spot on for that game, we could compete. At the time, I thought it was a bit self-indulgent. But given that that was the only time since relegation in 1995 that we didn't spend a PL season in a relegation battle, it clearly worked. Times have changed since then, obviously.

I think there was more to that too. I think he, Culverhouse and Karsa were a perfect trio.

I think Lambert also knew we couldn't be predictable. We went with 3 at the back on a couple of occaisions and almost threw the game away in the first half, he quickly reverted to the diamond.

I think he knew you had to mix things up, keep legs fresh and minds keen. To use players because it meant teams had to think.

I honestly think our play was not diverse enough under Farke for the top level with the players we had.

People will say how awful the signings were that summer which essentially ended in Farke's sacking. I wonder what Alex Neil, Hughton and Lambert would say in terms of the players on paper compared to the squads they had.

You can become too predictable, too reliant upon players. Buendia built our play, snuffle him out and he'd get frustrated, carded and our creativity halved.

Pukki was never a player that would often fashion chances without a good supply.

If you can reduce the offensive threat of a team, you can focus on attacking.

 

[Midlands Yellow 4,682]

24 minutes ago, chicken said:

I think there was more to that too. I think he, Culverhouse and Karsa were a perfect trio.

I think Lambert also knew we couldn't be predictable. We went with 3 at the back on a couple of occaisions and almost threw the game away in the first half, he quickly reverted to the diamond.

I think he knew you had to mix things up, keep legs fresh and minds keen. To use players because it meant teams had to think.

I honestly think our play was not diverse enough under Farke for the top level with the players we had.

People will say how awful the signings were that summer which essentially ended in Farke's sacking. I wonder what Alex Neil, Hughton and Lambert would say in terms of the players on paper compared to the squads they had.

You can become too predictable, too reliant upon players. Buendia built our play, snuffle him out and he'd get frustrated, carded and our creativity halved.

Pukki was never a player that would often fashion chances without a good supply.

If you can reduce the offensive threat of a team, you can focus on attacking.

 

Wise words Chicken, have you professionally coached many teams? If you haven’t you should have done. 

[horsefly 5,301]

Which PL team doesn't play a version of a "possession based, playing out from the back" game? The days of a team being able to survive in the PL by playing a radically different style have long gone (e.g. Stoke). The immense amount of money swilling around the PL means that the overall quality of average players has increased significantly, making it very unlikely that a more direct style of football would win out in enough games over teams playing the standard possession based game. The boring reality for teams like Southampton (and the majority of the usual relegation suspects) is that their main objective is to be better at playing this style of football than at least three other teams over the course of a season. I don't think it's some kind of purist idealism that encourages managers like Martin to persist with his style of play, but a belief that such perseverance offers the best opportunity to establish a pattern of play that will eventually pay out in survival. 

[Virtual reality 858]

18 hours ago, Big Vince said:

I hate Russell Martin. Biggest hypocrite alive. Lost on purpose in that 0-5 vs Brighton.

Utter tosh. He isn’t even a Brighton fan, he’s a Spurs fan 

Edited September 4 by Virtual reality

[Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man 4,580]

4 hours ago, Robert N. LiM said:

We were very direct in the Champs under Lambert, too, iirc. A reminder that exciting football doesn't always mean Farkeball (though that style does remain my favourite)

If I remember rightly, we were the highest scorers outside the top six in our Premier League season under Lambert. Farkeball it wasn't, but it was still fun to watch. 

I know most will disagree with me here, but I actually enjoyed watching Wagner's side last season as well (autumn aside). 

 

3 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Webber was magnificent for a few seasons, showed his true colours soon after and as you say was a narcissist. 

He was always a narcissist from day one, but when things were going well in the early days we could get behind him and laugh about it. When things went downhill, it wasn't a great look and resulted in a much faster and more toxic breakdown in the relationship between Webber and the fans.

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

7 minutes ago, Wacky Waving Inflatable Arm Flailing Tube Man said:

I know most will disagree with me here, but I actually enjoyed watching Wagner's side last season as well (autumn aside

Me too. I was never sure how sustainable it was, and quite a lot of the time it seemed batshìt to me, but there was plenty of fun along the way.

[Up and Away 91]

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Which PL team doesn't play a version of a "possession based, playing out from the back" game? The days of a team being able to survive in the PL by playing a radically different style have long gone (e.g. Stoke). The immense amount of money swilling around the PL means that the overall quality of average players has increased significantly, making it very unlikely that a more direct style of football would win out in enough games over teams playing the standard possession based game. The boring reality for teams like Southampton (and the majority of the usual relegation suspects) is that their main objective is to be better at playing this style of football than at least three other teams over the course of a season. I don't think it's some kind of purist idealism that encourages managers like Martin to persist with his style of play, but a belief that such perseverance offers the best opportunity to establish a pattern of play that will eventually pay out in survival. 

While I take your point that all PL teams play possession based football, Martin has been known for this style of play at every club he has managed (MK Dons, Swansea and Southampton). He has managed around 250 games in his career, only three of which are in the PL, so I would say this is idealism rather than a response to being in the PL. 

[chicken 3,079]

2 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

Wise words Chicken, have you professionally coached many teams? If you haven’t you should have done. 

Not professionally no.

[PurpleCanary 6,367]

That Lambert season was 12 years ago. The Premier League has changed massively since then, and not to our advantage.

[Robert N. LiM 6,208]

3 hours ago, Christoph Stiepermann said:

I think given all the options the approach we're taking now on paper at least looks like the best option but the odds of us staying up when we get promoted again are still fairly remote and would be no matter how we play

Really good post @Christoph Stiepermann

[JonnyJonnyRowe 955]

14 hours ago, Up and Away said:

By coincidence this popped up on my feed this morning.  A club by club guide to the PL transfer window from Swiss Ramble (who writes about football finances).  To add to my point about promoted clubs needing to spend heavily to compete. The last paragraph is quite stark and shows how challenging it is to get into the PL and stay there.

 

Ipswich Town

Ipswich have been out of England’s top flight for 22 years, so they really had some catching up to do with their squad after winning back-to-back promotions from League One and the Championship.

Many analysts bang on about the revenue boost if a club reaches the Premier League, but there is also a price to pay, as promoted clubs need to spend if they want to be competitive.

This meant that Ipswich spent £129m, more than four times as much as the previous 10 years combined. They only sold £2m, so their net spend was a staggering £127m, which was the second highest in the Premier League – and indeed the third highest in the world.

There wasn’t really one big money acquisition, but eight players arrived for €10m or more, the largest purchases being Omari Hutchinson from Chelsea, Jacob Greaves from Hull City, Liam Delap from Manchester City and Jack Clarke from Sunderland.

Their £147m gross spend over the last five years is by some distance the smallest of the clubs playing in the Premier League this season, less than half of Leicester City and Everton, who had £321m apiece.

But they went up as a dark horse, a team punching above their weight.

If they come down they'll come down with possibly the strongest squad in the division.

Flog a couple and achieve an instant return and they've made it all back with interest. They'll be coming down a lot stronger than they went up. Unfortunately we couldn't say the same when we went down the first time having only added Sam Byram.

Unfortunately I think that Ipswich are an ambitious and well run club and they have made strong acquisitions, mainly young English players that they can sell on for a profit.