HARD TRUTHS

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

Since everyone else seems to have started a thread on the same subject...[;)]

The new-broom effect of the new regime has obscured (for some at least) he uncomfortable truth that we because we are not top of the football food chain we are still subject to some harsh realities.

1. If we find a talented manager he WILL leave. The top six in my watching time, in alphabetical order, are Bond, Lambert, Macaulay, Saunders, Stringer and Walker. Saunders was sacked and Stringer effectively retired, burned out. The other four all walked out to join bigger clubs. There is no public evidence at all that we could have held on to Lambert, let alone anything to support the recent rather lonely thesis that the directors wanted him gone and may even have helped engineer his departure.

2. Apart from half a dozen or so world-renowned super-managers - whom we could never hope to attract - there is no guarantee that a new manager will do well. If I had a case of decent champagne for every post here expressing "total faith" or "total certainty" that McNally would choose the right successor to Lambert when the time came I would be very happy. And a bit tipsy. For starters, it was never going to be McNally''s decision, his major role in Lambert''s arrival notwithstanding. But more to the point, it is still laregly a lottery. As shown by the lack of consensus here when Lambert left.

3. We are still owned by paupers. The supposed riches of the Premier League are to an extent illusory. With the extra money comes extra expenditure. And we do have to pay off our hard debt by October 2013. Unless I am very much mistaken we are not going to arrange some new form of debt to pay off the existing debt. But what is hamstringing us in terms of attracting in players is not so much the debt - which is a short-term consideration - as our wage ceiling. Which is a much longer-term consideration. This is a guess, but I strongly suspect that all three promoted sides have a higher wage ceiling than ours, despite our squillions of pound in revenue from last season. That should be absurd. That shouldn''t be the case. But probably is. And we simply cannot take the risk of following the example of quite a few clubs we could all mention.

[Yellow Rider 0]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]Since everyone else seems to have started a thread on the same subject...[;)]

The new-broom effect of the new regime has obscured (for some at least) he uncomfortable truth that we because we are not top of the football food chain we are still subject to some harsh realities.

1. If we find a talented manager he WILL leave. The top six in my watching time, in alphabetical order, are Bond, Lambert, Macaulay, Saunders, Stringer and Walker. Saunders was sacked and Stringer effectively retired, burned out. The other four all walked out to join bigger clubs. There is no public evidence at all that we could have held on to Lambert, let alone anything to support the recent rather lonely thesis that the directors wanted him gone and may even have helped engineer his departure.

2. Apart from half a dozen or so world-renowned super-managers - whom we could never hope to attract - there is no guarantee that a new manager will do well. If I had a case of decent champagne for every post here expressing "total faith" or "total certainty" that McNally would choose the right successor to Lambert when the time came I would be very happy. And a bit tipsy. For starters, it was never going to be McNally''s decision, his major role in Lambert''s arrival notwithstanding. But more to the point, it is still laregly a lottery. As shown by the lack of consensus here when Lambert left.

3. We are still owned by paupers. The supposed riches of the Premier League are to an extent illusory. With the extra money comes extra expenditure. And we do have to pay off our hard debt by October 2013. Unless I am very much mistaken we are not going to arrange some new form of debt to pay off the existing debt. But what is hamstringing us in terms of attracting in players is not so much the debt - which is a short-term consideration - as our wage ceiling. Which is a much longer-term consideration. This is a guess, but I strongly suspect that all three promoted sides have a higher wage ceiling than ours, despite our squillions of pound in revenue from last season. That should be absurd. That shouldn''t be the case. But probably is. And we simply cannot take the risk of following the example of quite a few clubs we could all mention.[/quote]

Top post Purple - nice to see some measured response to the mob who simply follow the herd based on each Saturday''s results. Win next week (especially if it''s with any conviction) and they will disappear, lose and they will be getting the noose ready for CH''s neck and the stands for the baying public will be erected in front of Norwich Castle!  

I have had experience of hiring staff and no matter what process you go through, I totally agree that the end result remains (largely) down to luck. What is (or was) encouraging with the appointment of CH was the overwhelming goodwill and positive vibes from those in football and fans of Newcastle and Birmingham who spoke universally of admiration for the guy. Yet with one bad result the canary fanatics are ignoring all that and holding CH in same contempt as a certain Mr Roeder!

Provided he plays two up front (and we need to get someone with real pace in there) and also plays wide men on their correct flank instead of on the wrong side (like yesterday!) then I''m sure we''ll do ok. CH deserves our whole hearted backing whilst not being immune to constructive criticism when required.       

[paul moy 235]

Sorry, but the problem is not lack of money but organising the players we have into an effective attacking force. It was done last season and it can be done this season. The problem at the moment is the manager, who I hope sees the error of his ways and gets us a victory against QPR.

[JF 694]

We have outspent Fulham this summer by £3 million quid, So no the problem is not about money.

[Henry 0]

[quote user="JF"]We have outspent Fulham this summer by £3 million quid, So no the problem is not about money.[/quote]Wages? Think it has everything to do with money.Could we have been able to match offers for the likes of Rodallega etc? Out of contract good players are out of our league wages wise.

[Sing Up The South Stand 0]

I suspect Fulham pay significantly higher. In 2010/11 their wage bill was 58 million, 75 percent of their turnover. According to an article in the Guardian anyway.

[JF 694]

Guess we may as well give up then and accept we are above our level, Back to Championship mediocrity. Thinking about it though, There is the reported £90 million that promotion got us and the incentive of even more next season. We could pay more wages but the club don''t want to, Weather that is right or wrong is a different arguement.

[Sing Up The South Stand 0]

The £90m includes 1 seasons Prem money and 4 seasons parachute payments should we have got relegated after 1 season.

Like purple says, there''s not much we can do about the debt, with it having to be paid, but it should mean we can raise the bar a bit next season, whatever league we are in (although proportionally, should we be relegated).

[paul moy 235]

The performance yesterday had nothing to do with money.  Anybody that thinks otherwise is deluded.

[Carra Rud 17]

...its tactics, formation, team spirit... nothing to do with money or player "quality" we proved that last year with what was on paper a pretty average looking PL side... this season something has changed on and off the pitch and it ain''t good. That is down to Mr H and his backroom staff. I forsee a player revolt - the first signs of which were on the pitch yesterday.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Carra Rud"]...its tactics, formation, team spirit... nothing to do with money or player "quality" we proved that last year with what was on paper a pretty average looking PL side... this season something has changed on and off the pitch and it ain''t good. That is down to Mr H and his backroom staff. I forsee a player revolt - the first signs of which were on the pitch yesterday.
[/quote]

That was my view also. The players were not playing for the manager, just as they didn''t in the 7-1. In the first game of the season surely it''s not too much to ask for 100% commitment and fitness.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="JF"]We have outspent Fulham this summer by £3 million quid, So no the problem is not about money.[/quote]

 

Fulham have had the premier league millions year in year out to get the squad of players they have now. They are also in a position to pay much higher wages because of the owner they have. Last season we over-achieved where we would have realistically been expected to finish. The league table with very few exceptions mirrors the football budgets of the clubs involved. In the long run the problem is very much about money as I believe Bowkett recognised when he said something along the lines of we would need serious investment to become and established premier league club.

 

 

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="JF"]We have outspent Fulham this summer by £3 million quid, So no the problem is not about money.[/quote]

 

Fulham have had the premier league millions year in year out to get the squad of players they have now. They are also in a position to pay much higher wages because of the owner they have. Last season we over-achieved where we would have realistically been expected to finish. The league table with very few exceptions mirrors the football budgets of the clubs involved. In the long run the problem is very much about money as I believe Bowkett recognised when he said something along the lines of we would need serious investment to become and established premier league club.

 

 

[/quote]

I reiterate, yesterday''s abysmal performance was absolutely nothing to do with money.

[JF 694]

For the last time yesterday was not about wages or money, anyone who thinks it is didn''t watch the game. The players are more than capable as they have shown but yesterday the body language was telling us all we needed to know. They were not happy and seemed confused as to what the game plan was. It was Colchester all over again.

Regarding the wages if we don''t up it a bit and i''m not saying throw the clubs future at it, but more speculate to accumulate, Then our stay in this league will be short lived.

[Felixfan 53]

After going to bed in despair last night I had a dream and realised it was all part of the "Seven year plan". We had got ahead of ourself as this should have been our yo yo year so we starve the best manager we ever had of funds and appoint a nice guy steeped in mediocrity with a nondescript coaching staff. and to appease the fans we retain our ageing centre forward but do not find him a strike partner - so far so good. Not satisfied with that we release our two best centre backs and replace them with a donkey. A masterstroke in planning you would say but they might remember how they overachieved last year so the game plan had to be changed to ensure we were still on track. It was then I woke up with the fans still singing "Hughton for the Championship" and "Ipswich Ipswich here we come"

I hope it was a bad dream.

 

 

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

[quote user="paul moy"]The performance yesterday had nothing to do with money.  Anybody that thinks otherwise is deluded.[/quote]

 

Obviously, Paul,you weren''t aiming that at me, because I didn''t see yesterday''s game, or any highlights. I have no idea why we played - apparently - so listlessly. For that reason I was careful not to comment specifically. I was making a much more general point about how our financial position affects pretty much everything.

It certainly was a major factor in Lambert leaving. And in the pool of managers from whom we were able to choose for a replacement. And in the players then available to that manager to buy. You plainly have grave doubts about Hughton as a manager. Fine. They may prove justified. Or not. But, as I said in the OP, we will never attract a sure-fire, nailed-on success as a manager. We will not get Mourinho. Or Hiddink. Or whoever. We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position. If there is a delusion on this message-board it lies in not understanding that.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="JF"]For the last time yesterday was not about wages or money, anyone who thinks it is didn''t watch the game. The players are more than capable as they have shown but yesterday the body language was telling us all we needed to know. They were not happy and seemed confused as to what the game plan was. It was Colchester all over again. Regarding the wages if we don''t up it a bit and i''m not saying throw the clubs future at it, but more speculate to accumulate, Then our stay in this league will be short lived.[/quote]

 

Agree, but if we spend money without addressing the basic failings in motivation, team-spirit, organisation and fitness, then that money is wasted, just like HMG throwing money at the NHS without fixing the fundamental failings and thus creating debt for debt''s sake. 

[Dubai Mark 0]

A great post amongst an absolute avalanche of total over reaction as per usual on this board. Yes, yesterday''s performance was poor against what I thought was, on the day, an excellent Fulham side who were clearly better prepared and up to speed for the first match of the season. Before the game, I didnt expect a tonking but thought we would be lucky to get something out of it, they are no mugs and have a terrific Manager behind them who has put together a very talented squad. Other teams also got their first game horribly wrong, teams with much higher expections than us and who have spent big money. CH would have learnt a hell of a lot from the match as would the players and I am sure they werent proud of the display and will work hard to put things right next week, against a team who will also have something to prove and who "on paper" are stronger than in many peoples opinions I''m sure. Interesting that a couple of friend of mine who are QPR fans attitutude is very different, they are putting yesterday down as a bit of a bad day at the office, and are now looking forward to putting things right with an "easy win at Norwich", a view they had though before yesterday I must add, which really annoyed me!  

 

I am intrigued to know exactly why carra rud and paul moy have decided are the first signs of a "player revolt", examples please? I thought a few players were showing the expected frustration signs of having played like girls and being on the end of a tonking in very hot conditions myself. 

Please everyone, get a grip! CH and the team have a hard enough job this season without a premature upswelling of whatever it is that upswells (new word?) a little too quickly from our supporters at times when the word "support" is critical to the success of the team! 

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Dubai Mark"]

A great post amongst an absolute avalanche of total over reaction as per usual on this board. Yes, yesterday''s performance was poor against what I thought was, on the day, an excellent Fulham side who were clearly better prepared and up to speed for the first match of the season. Before the game, I didnt expect a tonking but thought we would be lucky to get something out of it, they are no mugs and have a terrific Manager behind them who has put together a very talented squad. Other teams also got their first game horribly wrong, teams with much higher expections than us and who have spent big money. CH would have learnt a hell of a lot from the match as would the players and I am sure they werent proud of the display and will work hard to put things right next week, against a team who will also have something to prove and who "on paper" are stronger than in many peoples opinions I''m sure. Interesting that a couple of friend of mine who are QPR fans attitutude is very different, they are putting yesterday down as a bit of a bad day at the office, and are now looking forward to putting things right with an "easy win at Norwich", a view they had though before yesterday I must add, which really annoyed me!  

 

I am intrigued to know exactly why carra rud and paul moy have decided are the first signs of a "player revolt", examples please? I thought a few players were showing the expected frustration signs of having played like girls and being on the end of a tonking in very hot conditions myself. 

Please everyone, get a grip! CH and the team have a hard enough job this season without a premature upswelling of whatever it is that upswells (new word?) a little too quickly from our supporters at times when the word "support" is critical to the success of the team! 

[/quote]

 

I never said there was a player revolt, just that the players gave the appearance of not playing for the new manager. Slightly different methinks.  

What if QPR do get an easy win ?  That can''t be beyond the bounds of possibility. I only hope that QPR fear us and adopt a safety first strategy as we did at Fulham or we could be in trouble. They may think it''s worthwhile just throwing a few pacy forwards at us after having seen yesterday''s debacle.

[Highland Canary 78]

An excellent post Purple. In my time watching City I would say the top two managers were Bond and Lambert with Stringer then Walker not far behind.

The team exceeded expectations under Lambert. Getting these players to perform at the same level for a second season would have been hard for Lambert, more difficult for any other manager. Hence, you have to improve the average quality of the squad that means higher wages and our financial position means we can''t afford to do so without threatening the financial viability of the club which, thankfully, Bowkett has publicly said he is unwilling to do. So, to compete in the premier league over the medium term the club needs external investment and, probably, an exceptional manager. Time will tell if Hughton is that man or not.

But our general situation - if not yesterday''s specific performance - is all to do with money. There is a strong positive correlation between football performance and wage spend. In other words, on average the more a club spends the higher the league position. Of course, we can all point to exceptions. Arguably, we were one such last year. But you can only expect to beat the odds for so long. This is a challenge which we should not underestimate.

[paul moy 235]

Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="paul moy"]

[quote user="JF"]For the last time yesterday was not about wages or money, anyone who thinks it is didn''t watch the game. The players are more than capable as they have shown but yesterday the body language was telling us all we needed to know. They were not happy and seemed confused as to what the game plan was. It was Colchester all over again. Regarding the wages if we don''t up it a bit and i''m not saying throw the clubs future at it, but more speculate to accumulate, Then our stay in this league will be short lived.[/quote]

 

Agree, but if we spend money without addressing the basic failings in motivation, team-spirit, organisation and fitness, then that money is wasted, just like HMG throwing money at the NHS without fixing the fundamental failings and thus creating debt for debt''s sake. 

[/quote]

 

I didn''t think this thread was about yesterdays game. There are so many threads saying the same things about that. This thread was about the  bigger picture. For the record I didn''t see yesterdays game either. If you guys want to relegate us on the back of one performance and result then that''s fine but it''s rather unfair to take this thread off topic when there are so many others stating your point of view.

 

 

 

 

[JF 694]

Fair enough regarding the bigger picture then yes unfortunately the PL is all about money. As for yesterdays game you state you didn''t see it and you are one of the lucky one''s then. The reason there is so many sharing that view is because it was that bad i''m afraid, Worryingly bad.

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[/quote]

But if he was appointed and he replicated that here we''d be relegated. 1 game is too early to judge bu I doubt Hughton is a Lambert. However I know Holloway isnt.

 

 

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[/quote]

But if he was appointed and he replicated that here we''d be relegated. 1 game is too early to judge bu I doubt Hughton is a Lambert. However I know Holloway isnt.

 

 

[/quote]

.. but you''re missing the point. We''d go down attacking and entertaining at least with a chance of staying up. Holloway would have tried for 3 points yesterday, not 1. With Hughton we''re doomed unless he changes his defensive ways.

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[/quote]

 

Per ruddy exactly.  [Y]

[nutty nigel 7,902]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="nutty nigel"][quote user="paul moy"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[/quote]

But if he was appointed and he replicated that here we''d be relegated. 1 game is too early to judge bu I doubt Hughton is a Lambert. However I know Holloway isnt.

 

 

[/quote]

.. but you''re missing the point. We''d go down attacking and entertaining at least with a chance of staying up. Holloway would have tried for 3 points yesterday, not 1. With Hughton we''re doomed unless he changes his defensive ways.

[/quote]

And you know all that after one game? If I was you I''d have a go on the Canary Challenge. Predicting the top six and bottom three should be a doddle.....

 

BTW  Blackpool lost their first PL away game 0-6.

 

 

[PurpleCanary 6,385]

[quote user="paul moy"][quote user="PurpleCanary"]

[quote user="paul moy"]Ah ok..... so the tactics yesterday were because of money..... we''re DOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMED. How ever did Lambert do it I wonder............    [/quote]

 

Paul, try to understand these four simple sentences:

 We will attract the Hughtons of this world. And some will work. And others won''t. And that is down to our financial position.

[/quote]

One easy sentence for you PC. We could have got a more experienced HOLLOWAY who is an attack-minded coach, managed a team throughout a whole Prem season, and produced some football to be admired, and on a much lower budget than ours. 

[/quote]

 

And got Blackpool relegated. Which rather makes my point. Whoever we pick is going to come out of that pool of managers who are not guaranteed to be successful. Holloway might have worked here. Or he might not. You cannot guarantee that he would have been a good choice. Just as Hughton might work here, over the next 37 games. Or he might not. And ultimately the fact that we have to chose a manager who is not garenteed to be a winner is due to our financial position.