Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
PurpleCanary

HARD TRUTHS

Recommended Posts

I think the whole point is that we just don''t know whether it''ll work out with anyone until they are given a fair crack of the whip, which one game doesn''t come close to being.

But I am as certain as I can be in my own mind that Holloway was never the answer, but Hughton could be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For the first time, & almost certainly the last time, I agree with Wiz about the manager.

The whole Lambert saga was a very rare, possibly once in a lifetime, conjunction of events. He arrived at our lowest point & was able to rebuild a squad & recognised the hidden talents of the remainder, achieving an unstoppable momentum & euphoric self belief. I rather doubt he''ll do this again, wherever he plies his trade.

So we cannot hope to replicate this level of success (sans billionaire, at any rate). Which means relegation is a distinct possibility. We must accept this.

But, more than relegation, I fear performances like yesterday''s being the norm. What a fekker of a season that would be.

No, boys, if you go down, go down fighting. Holloway might be as daft as a brush, but we''d be entertained, appalled & delighted all season. And, who can say, he might just pull it of ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][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.

[/quote]

The fact is that supporters want entertaining football and if you cannot entertain then you must win. Holloway would entertain and we''d love him here. Hughton appears not be able to entertain or win but I accept it is an early judgement.  Yes, he got them relegated, but by a whisker and with a poor squad and with the Charlie Adam shenanigans which ripped into his team-spirit mid-season. With us and our superior squad I think he would keep us up, but at least we''d enjoy the ride if  he didn''t.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We certainly won''t attract a top-class manager.......as much as, we certainly won''t attract a large investor.....

 

"We''ll just go with what we''ve got"........We''re ''ickle''......and just punchin'' above our weight......and always will be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="paul moy"]

The fact is that supporters want entertaining football and if you cannot entertain then you must win. Holloway would entertain and we''d love him here. Hughton appears not be able to entertain or win but I accept it is an early judgement.  Yes, he got them relegated, but by a whisker and with a poor squad and with the Charlie Adam shenanigans which ripped into his team-spirit mid-season. With us and our superior squad I think he would keep us up, but at least we''d enjoy the ride if  he didn''t.  

 

[/quote]

 

Two points. Firstly, yes, you are making snap judgments on one performance. Something I have not done. Secondly, you have the first sentence the wrong way round. What supporters want is sucesss/survival. Only if you can''t have success will supporters accept gloriously entertaining losing football. Offer 99 per cent of Canary fans (including me) the choice between gung-ho relegation and boring survival and they will pick the latter. Especially this season, with the prospect of next year having no hard debt and benefiting from the improved TV deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron, I thought I saw you say on a different thread that you would not be posting again. I was disappointed when I read that because I like what you have to say. 

 

Purple says this thread is about facing hard truths. Okay, here''s one of my hard truths. A new, experienced sales manager at a company ( the operative word is experienced ) does not look at the results of the sales for week one, and tell the listening world, which then includes his sales force and the people that have just hired him, unfortunately our products are inferior and so we have to recognise that. If I was the CEO of such a company and heard that input then I can promise you a very hard truth. That experienced sales manager would be on the carpet on Monday morning of the new work week and he would promptly be informed that any repeat of that type of reaction from him as he gets his BRAND NEW CAMPAIGN underway will result in his  prompt dismissal. Regardless of the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
YC - I lied! I was so hacked off for being vilified for what I thought was an innocuous comment I resolved not to post again.

Unfortunately my resolve capitulated after yesterday''s debacle. Perhaps I''m a bit more like Wiz than I''d care to admit ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ron obvious"]YC - I lied! I was so hacked off for being vilified for what I thought was an innocuous comment I resolved not to post again. Unfortunately my resolve capitulated after yesterday''s debacle. Perhaps I''m a bit more like Wiz than I''d care to admit ...[/quote]

 

   Don''t worry Ron, everyone''s got a bit of wiz in them. [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that the original post was a good one, precise and carefully measured and really don''t understand why there seems to have been so many extraneous points brought into it.

As noted above, there is a strong correlation between wages and league performance. We know that there are exceptions but they tend to be short-lived - similar to what statisticians call "regression to the mean" - see definition below.

"a statistical phenomenon that can make natural variation in repeated data look like real change."

In many walks of life we see exceptional performance (either negative or positive) and there are all sorts of people prepared to offer an explanation for it - eg I lived to be a hundred and fifty because I eat grapefruits every day.

In football terms,we see clubs defy the odds for short periods of time, but in the end, they regress to the mean. For Norwich City to have sustained success in the top half of the premiership, we need some form of structural change to our finances - a sugar daddy/ mummy; significantly increased gate revenues or something else along these lines. The board is aware of this, hence talk of increased capacity.

Of course we are not helped by others having sugar daddies/ mummies - given the size of our gate, I suspect that we would benefit from financial fair play if it is ever effectively implemented.

I suspect that these are the realities that Purple is trying to spell out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Wiz"]Don''t worry Ron, everyone''s got a bit of wiz in them. [;)][/quote]Those virgins didn''t have! [+o(]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Wiz"]

[quote user="ron obvious"]YC - I lied! I was so hacked off for being vilified for what I thought was an innocuous comment I resolved not to post again. Unfortunately my resolve capitulated after yesterday''s debacle. Perhaps I''m a bit more like Wiz than I''d care to admit ...[/quote]

 

   Don''t worry Ron, everyone''s got a bit of wiz in them. [;)]

[/quote]Although when they find out, most people opt for radiotherapy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="YankeeCanary"]

Ron, I thought I saw you say on a different thread that you would not be posting again. I was disappointed when I read that because I like what you have to say. 

 

Purple says this thread is about facing hard truths. Okay, here''s one of my hard truths. A new, experienced sales manager at a company ( the operative word is experienced ) does not look at the results of the sales for week one, and tell the listening world, which then includes his sales force and the people that have just hired him, unfortunately our products are inferior and so we have to recognise that. If I was the CEO of such a company and heard that input then I can promise you a very hard truth. That experienced sales manager would be on the carpet on Monday morning of the new work week and he would promptly be informed that any repeat of that type of reaction from him as he gets his BRAND NEW CAMPAIGN underway will result in his  prompt dismissal. Regardless of the consequences.

[/quote]

 

I think you''re quite right Yankee.

 

Your post really needs a thread on its own so that people can get their teeth into it more vsibly.

 

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user=" Badger"]I thought that the original post was a good one, precise and carefully measured and really don''t understand why there seems to have been so many extraneous points brought into it. As noted above, there is a strong correlation between wages and league performance. We know that there are exceptions but they tend to be short-lived - similar to what statisticians call "regression to the mean" - see definition below. "a statistical phenomenon that can make natural variation in repeated data look like real change." In many walks of life we see exceptional performance (either negative or positive) and there are all sorts of people prepared to offer an explanation for it - eg I lived to be a hundred and fifty because I eat grapefruits every day. In football terms,we see clubs defy the odds for short periods of time, but in the end, they regress to the mean. For Norwich City to have sustained success in the top half of the premiership, we need some form of structural change to our finances - a sugar daddy/ mummy; significantly increased gate revenues or something else along these lines. The board is aware of this, hence talk of increased capacity. Of course we are not helped by others having sugar daddies/ mummies - given the size of our gate, I suspect that we would benefit from financial fair play if it is ever effectively implemented. I suspect that these are the realities that Purple is trying to spell out.[/quote]

 

Badger, exactly. The only point I would make is that that over time this regression to the mean can change, in that the mean can alter. I have not double-checked these figures but...

Until we got promotion to the second tier in 1959-60 we had spent 33 seasons in either Division Three or Division Three (South) and only five season in the second tier. Our mean, our natural place, was in the bottom half of the food chain that is English football. Since then we have spent one season in the third tier, 29 seasons in the second, and 23 in the first.

For various reasons, including socio-economic factors (sorry if that sounds Guardianeseque but it''s true) our mean, our natural place, is now in the top half of the food chain. A poster here recently placed us in the top 30. Which is probably fair. But we are in the bottom half of the top 30. And what we have hit is a glass ceiling that separates us from the top dozen or so. We are, by PL standards, dirt poor, and we have a small ground. Ouir mean has improved over decades. But only by so much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

1. ..... Saunders was sacked ......... The other four all walked out to join bigger clubs. 
[/quote]

I thought there was a row in the boardroom, Saunders offered his resignation, Arthur South initially rejected it but Saunders made it clear he was going. Within the week he was appointed manager of Manchester City.......who I think you will agree were a bigger club than us at the time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I agree that the mean changes over time as there are structural changes to the variables affecting performance - be quite an interesting dissertation for one of the younger posters?

For example, what has been the impact of the deindustrialisation that the Thatcher caused or at least exacerbated. Does this partially explain the relative decline of the bastions of English football from Yorkshire and Lancashire (except for those with exceptional brand names/ external financial support); impact of Taylor/ all-seater stadia (and other factors), changing the traditional audience for football matches etc. Then of course there is the Sky money!

Re our natural position - I would argue that under genuine financial fair play we would be higher than the top 30 that you cite. I think that our attendances last year would place us 14th in these terms and I think that our other revenue streams are quite well developed, but have no evidence to support this. We will know more when accounts are published, but somewhere about 12th to 15th seems reasonable? However, FFP does not exist yet, and might never be properly established, so the current mean is below this.

Regardless of FFP, the need to develop external sources of revenue - catering/ hotels etc, derided by so many fans is pretty clear, unless we sell out to a billionaire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user=" Badger"]Yes I agree that the mean changes over time as there are structural changes to the variables affecting performance - be quite an interesting dissertation for one of the younger posters? For example, what has been the impact of the deindustrialisation that the Thatcher caused or at least exacerbated. Does this partially explain the relative decline of the bastions of English football from Yorkshire and Lancashire (except for those with exceptional brand names/ external financial support); impact of Taylor/ all-seater stadia (and other factors), changing the traditional audience for football matches etc. Then of course there is the Sky money! Re our natural position - I would argue that under genuine financial fair play we would be higher than the top 30 that you cite. I think that our attendances last year would place us 14th in these terms and I think that our other revenue streams are quite well developed, but have no evidence to support this. We will know more when accounts are published, but somewhere about 12th to 15th seems reasonable? However, FFP does not exist yet, and might never be properly established, so the current mean is below this. Regardless of FFP, the need to develop external sources of revenue - catering/ hotels etc, derided by so many fans is pretty clear, unless we sell out to a billionaire.[/quote]

 

Funny you should say that, Badger!



http://services.pinkun.com/forums/pinkun/cs/forums/2463549/ShowPost.aspx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good thread with some interesting points made.

If you were to boil it down to one principle it is luck. Not in the sense of decisions going your way on the pitch, but as to whether a manager works out. Every single club ever has had good managers which make them great teams, and bad managers where they struggle. Some managers start great and get worse, some start pooorly but given time turn it round. You just never know how one manager will react and gel, or not, with any one particular group of players, nor even the players who he brings in which he won''t truly understand until they play for him. Even lavishing money left right and centre won''t guarantee success, if they don''t get on with the manager it''s doomed and many clubs have spent big only to still, ultimately, fail. So, money helps, but only to a point until you get to the Chelsea/Man City levels of super benefactor. How many so called great manager have Chelsea hired since Mourinho before their next lucky break which was ironically a caretaker?

Accepting the principle that managerial success is down to luck, when you get a good manager you do your level best to keep him. And that is the issue. Whereas an Everton can keep Moyes, and Arsenal and Man Utd can keep theirs, for clubs like Norwich we will always be subject to the lure of the bigger boys. So our good managers have always gone, often quite quickly. It will always happen. the big boys can change their managers at will and attract whosoever they want. Clubs of our size can''t.  So the next guy may or may not work, as a previous poster says, any recruitment is always a bit of a lottery. So we have this cycle, of boom, lose manager, uncertainty, boom or bust, lose/sack manager, uncertainty etc.

For me this is the real hard truth. Accepting that we will never be as big as the large City powerhouses with their fanbases and global reach, we are almost inevitably resigned to the boom/bust cycle. So the message is enjoy the good times, however long or short they may be, for the next turn of the cycle will be just around the corner.   With CH as the latest new manager we just don''t know yet whether that turn is here. But if it is, its just another phase in the inexorable rolling of the dice that is football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="paul moy"]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.[/quote]

 

Perhaps you could demonstrate your vast knowledge and experience by explaining to him exactly what he needs to do. Don''t be coy. I''m sure it will be appreciated. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...