|
Post by rovingpotter on Jul 29, 2015 12:19:57 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Kjones9 on Jul 29, 2015 12:23:42 GMT
The Bournemouth love in starting early.
|
|
|
Post by GrahamHyde on Jul 29, 2015 12:27:06 GMT
Premier League clubs*
I'd have us higher, much higher. Definitely above Tottenham and Arsenal. Probably above others too.
|
|
|
Post by rovingpotter on Jul 29, 2015 12:27:09 GMT
Yes, they will be rivalling their South coast neighbours for plaudits this year
|
|
|
Post by StokeOnTour on Jul 29, 2015 12:28:12 GMT
Not sure how Norwich and West Brom are higher that ourselves?
|
|
|
Post by rovingpotter on Jul 29, 2015 12:28:44 GMT
True about it being purely Premier League clubs too. Forest Green Rovers are a great small club well run.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2015 12:38:39 GMT
West Brom? Fucking hell
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jul 29, 2015 12:39:28 GMT
Not sure how Norwich and West Brom are higher that ourselves? Exactly , relegation on a frequent basis , succession of managers . I don't call them well run
|
|
|
Post by stokesaint1 on Jul 29, 2015 12:47:17 GMT
Would be interesting to see how they scored the crieria used. Financial stability, ambition and shrewdness are hardly the sum total key criteria to establish a well run football club and, from those, only financial stability can be measured objectively. I'll leave it, thank you. File under "subjective crap"
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Jul 29, 2015 12:49:26 GMT
Arsenal well run?
For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years.
Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Jul 29, 2015 12:56:19 GMT
Bournemouth one of the best run? They've just got a rich owner who has spunked millions on the gamble of getting them promoted, they're hundred million in debt. If they go straight back down -which they will- they'll be joining their south coast neighbours up shit street.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 29, 2015 12:59:28 GMT
Arsenal well run? For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years. Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant. to be fair it does state it's based on financial stability and shrewdness rather than anything to do with how they perform on the pitch or how they treat their fans. it's just a financial top ten really in terms of debt management and revenue and on that score you can't argue much; Arsenal are notoriously "Well run" financially
|
|
|
Post by Linx on Jul 29, 2015 13:05:03 GMT
Crystal Palace, Norwich and WBA have been on roller coaster rides, no manager lasting more than 18 months, and two of them experiencing the yo-yo pattern, during the same period in which we have been promoted, consolidated and improved our premier league status, and with only two managers, both of whom have had the opportunity to imprint their philosophy and ethos on the club - something that only the likes of Wenger and Ferguson Have been able to do.
Bournemouth don't count, because they have not played a single second of Premier League football yet. Everton have an antiquated ground without any investment in refurbishment that holds them back, and notoriously have little money to spend.
Personally I would put us in the top five, but I'm not a London journo.
|
|
|
Post by dirtygary69 on Jul 29, 2015 13:07:23 GMT
Premier League clubs* I'd have us higher, much higher. Definitely above Tottenham and Arsenal. Probably above others too.
Was about to put the same thing, hardly the best 'in the country' if you look at what goes on in the leagues below. I don't know if this is based on anything in particular but I'd like to think we're definitely in the top 5 in terms of Premier League clubs. If you took it into the wider range encompassing all four divisions, we'd probably struggle to get in the top 15. Teams like Crewe would be top of the pile.
Bournemouth is a bit of joke inclusion - they've spent an awful lot to reach the PL but their stability is likely to remain with Eddie Howe at the helm. Watford did remarkably well but went through and 14 different managers just last season.
|
|
|
Post by cousindupree on Jul 29, 2015 13:08:20 GMT
Is the list really in some sort of order? I can see a case for most of the suggestions but surely not in that order. You have to weight well run against achievement and based on that probably Southampton only eclipse us. But huge respect goes to Everton and Bill Kenwright, hardly a mega rich man but has kept Everton up in the top tier while other big club have had spells in the lower leagues.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Jul 29, 2015 13:38:19 GMT
Arsenal well run? For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years. Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant. But for the money they spend, compared to others in and around them, I'd say they are well run.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jul 29, 2015 14:45:55 GMT
Did we really rely heavily on the Coates fortune? Not sure it would equate to more than 5-10m per season average.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 29, 2015 15:02:14 GMT
Did we really rely heavily on the Coates fortune? Not sure it would equate to more than 5-10m per season average. It is reducing and might be down to break even by now - we'll know when the accounts come out. But in our early years in the Prem we made bigger losses - first because of the infrastructure improvements plus player purchases, followed later later by big increases in the wage bill and we broke our transfer record. Wasn't the biggest annual loss something like £30 million a few years back when several big contract amortisations etc. combined in a perfect storm? Much healthier now though.
|
|
|
Post by cousindupree on Jul 29, 2015 15:12:02 GMT
Did we really rely heavily on the Coates fortune? Not sure it would equate to more than 5-10m per season average. It is reducing and might be down to break even by now - we'll know when the accounts come out. But in our early years in the Prem we made bigger losses - first because of the infrastructure improvements plus player purchases, followed later later by big increases in the wage bill and we broke our transfer record. Wasn't the biggest annual loss something like £30 million a few years back when several big contract amortisations etc. combined in a perfect storm? Much healthier now though. It will be very interesting to see the accounts and what is owed to Bet365. With the purse strings being pulled tight for what is now the last 4 windows and significant increases in revenue from TV surely the debt must have been recovered by now. Its shaping up to be another very good window for Bet365 and their shareholders
|
|
|
Post by chiswickpotter on Jul 29, 2015 15:19:27 GMT
It is reducing and might be down to break even by now - we'll know when the accounts come out. But in our early years in the Prem we made bigger losses - first because of the infrastructure improvements plus player purchases, followed later later by big increases in the wage bill and we broke our transfer record. Wasn't the biggest annual loss something like £30 million a few years back when several big contract amortisations etc. combined in a perfect storm? Much healthier now though. It will be very interesting to see the accounts and what is owed to Bet365. With the purse strings being pulled tight for what is now the last 4 windows and significant increases in revenue from TV surely the debt must have been recovered by now. Its shaping up to be another very good window for Bet365 and their shareholders It will take a few more years before the Bet365 funding is close to repaid. Even without too any big fees, signing in payments and wages have increased.
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Jul 29, 2015 16:21:23 GMT
It will be very interesting to see the accounts and what is owed to Bet365. With the purse strings being pulled tight for what is now the last 4 windows and significant increases in revenue from TV surely the debt must have been recovered by now. Its shaping up to be another very good window for Bet365 and their shareholders It will take a few more years before the Bet365 funding is close to repaid. Even without too any big fees, signing in payments and wages have increased. I agree. I think we probably are close to break even and may have made a small profit for the financial year just ended. But the debt was pretty big (£50 million ish in directors' loans is the figure in my head) so it will be a good few years before the Bet365 loans are repaid unless some of the debt the debt is converted to shares.
|
|
|
Post by broomey1983 on Jul 29, 2015 16:34:04 GMT
How Palace are up there after being in administration in 2010 is beyond me
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on Jul 29, 2015 21:43:43 GMT
Arsenal well run? For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years. Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant. and they fail to capitalize on a global fanbase, unlike man utd.
|
|
|
Post by rosco on Jul 29, 2015 22:02:10 GMT
Forest green are helped by their millionaire owner tbf, wouldn't call them well run, just wealthy.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jul 29, 2015 22:39:13 GMT
Interesting to read the comments, some lumping us in with Bournemouth as the benefactors of sugar daddies.
Judge_Snyder • 3 hours ago Stoke and Bournemouth have no business being in a list like this, both of them having heavy subsidy from wealthy owners to thank for their current positions.
|
|
|
Post by whereami on Jul 30, 2015 0:47:09 GMT
The close season rule is, any sports page with a TOP X OF X means they're desperate for clicks to increase the advertising revenue and they have fuck all to say. The order of these top 10's may as well be drawn by a lottery
|
|
|
Post by sheriff on Jul 30, 2015 2:45:26 GMT
Arsenal well run? For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years. Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant. That's nonsense. How are they underperforming on the pitch? Liverpool on a top 4 budget floating around midtable for 5 of the last 6 years without European football is "underperforming". Arsenal finishing 3rd or 4th consistently behind 3 of the biggest spenders in Europe is not underperforming by any stretch. Arsenal are the only team in England that Spurs ( a fantastically run cub by Levy) haven't finished above in the last 5 years and who hven't fnished below the top 4 in that time. Hell,they've not done so in 20 years. That is a level of consistency that I've found is highly underrated by many. It's not as easy as it looks hitting top 4 year after year.
|
|
|
Post by ukcstokie on Jul 30, 2015 8:16:19 GMT
Arsenal well run? For their size they under performing on the pitch - and have been for years. Their exploitation of fans with ticket prices is quite frankly repugnant. That's nonsense. How are they underperforming on the pitch? Liverpool on a top 4 budget floating around midtable for 5 of the last 6 years without European football is "underperforming". Arsenal finishing 3rd or 4th consistently behind 3 of the biggest spenders in Europe is not underperforming by any stretch. Arsenal are the only team in England that Spurs ( a fantastically run cub by Levy) haven't finished above in the last 5 years and who hven't fnished below the top 4 in that time. Hell,they've not done so in 20 years. That is a level of consistency that I've found is highly underrated by many. It's not as easy as it looks hitting top 4 year after year. So in the last 10 years what have they won? The FA Cup a few times. They've hardly threatened the league in that time too.
|
|
|
Post by rawli on Jul 30, 2015 8:59:50 GMT
How Palace are up there after being in administration in 2010 is beyond me Their postcode
|
|
|
Post by sheriff on Jul 30, 2015 9:02:44 GMT
That's nonsense. How are they underperforming on the pitch? Liverpool on a top 4 budget floating around midtable for 5 of the last 6 years without European football is "underperforming". Arsenal finishing 3rd or 4th consistently behind 3 of the biggest spenders in Europe is not underperforming by any stretch. Arsenal are the only team in England that Spurs ( a fantastically run cub by Levy) haven't finished above in the last 5 years and who hven't fnished below the top 4 in that time. Hell,they've not done so in 20 years. That is a level of consistency that I've found is highly underrated by many. It's not as easy as it looks hitting top 4 year after year. So in the last 10 years what have they won? The FA Cup a few times. They've hardly threatened the league in that time too. Winning "the FA Cup a few times" is a laudable achievement. I'm not sure why the goalposts are shifted at every level of achievement. Arsenal were once ridiculed as deluded and arrogant for their seeming apathy towards the cup competitions when Wenger prioritized CL qualification, but suddenly, they're almost supposed to feel ashamed to "only" win the FA cup? With Wenger's arrival, Arsenal went from a drab, boring, defensive team of mid-table cloggers in the early to mid 90's to 3 titles in 7 years between '97 and '04. The subsequent arrival of billionaire owners and a short-term financially crippling stadium move naturally saw their ambitions curtailed in that period. At worst - at absolute worst - you could call their achievements "par" for expectation. To say they're underachieving on the pitch is ridiculous. In Wenger's time at Arsenal, it's actually a fact that no team with a less expensive squad has ever finished above Arsenal. There is not ONE single team in the division that can say that.
|
|