|
Post by PotterLog on Mar 7, 2018 18:44:22 GMT
I can't quite get my head round this... if and when Baggies and us drop this year, the longest-established team in the Prem outside the "big" seven (including Everton) will be Swansea. To put that in context that means that outside those big seven, every team currently in the Prem has been promoted to the division since we played in the FA Cup final. And since we were promoted, the 12 other PL spots have been occupied by twenty-eight different teams, with not one of them ever-present over that ten-year spell.
Two-thirds of the top flight seems to have become a conveyor belt of teams of very modest size and history - many of whom were making their first appearance in the top flight for a very long time, or ever - Swansea, Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Huddersfield, Palace... then there's us, Baggies, Leicester, Saints - it would be no surprise if any of those disappeared soon (most of them could still go down this season). In recent years we've had Hull, Cardiff, Blackpool, Norwich, Birmingham... and Derby, Bristol City, Preston and Sheff U are all in with a chance of the play-off spot for next year. Is this a normal turnover for two-thirds of the teams in the top division?
Meanwhile lots of traditionally big and succesful(-ish) teams have been relegated or languish in the lower divisions - Forest, Villa, Derby, Sheff Wed, Leeds, Sunderland... (there are more major trophy-winning teams in the Champo than there are in the Prem).
When the Prem TV revenue ballooned (and parachute payments for relegated teams with it), the received wisdom was that PL teams would strengthen their grip on the places at the top table and it would become harder and harder for smaller teams to break into. But if anything the contrary has happened - beyond the PL top six it's turned into a free-for-all for the rest of the Prem and most of the Championship, regardless of the "size" of the club. How come?
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Mar 7, 2018 18:50:34 GMT
We currently are the longest serving outside the big seven.
Makes you wonder how it's all gone so wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2018 18:59:01 GMT
I can't quite get my head round this... if and when Baggies and us drop this year, the longest-established team in the Prem outside the "big" seven (including Everton) will be Swansea. To put that in context that means that outside those big seven, every team currently in the Prem has been promoted to the division since we played in the FA Cup final. And since we were promoted, the 12 other PL spots have been occupied by twenty-eight different teams, with not one of them ever-present over that ten-year spell. Two-thirds of the top flight seems to have become a conveyor belt of teams of very modest size and history - many of whom were making their first appearance in the top flight for a very long time, or ever - Swansea, Watford, Bournemouth, Burnley, Huddersfield, Palace... then there's us, Baggies, Leicester, Saints - it would be no surprise if any of those disappeared soon (most of them could still go down this season). In recent years we've had Hull, Blackpool, Norwich, Birmingham... and Derby, Bristol City, Preston and Sheff U are all in with a chance of the play-off spot for next year. Is this a normal turnover for two-thirds of the teams in the top division? Meanwhile lots of traditionally big and succesful(-ish) teams have been relegated or languish in the lower divisions - Forest, Villa, Derby, Sheff Wed, Leeds, Sunderland... (there are more major trophy-winning teams in the Champo than there are in the Prem). When the Prem TV revenue ballooned (and parachute payments for relegated teams with it), the received wisdom was that PL teams would strengthen their grip on the places at the top table and it would become harder and harder for smaller teams to break into. But if anything the contrary has happened - beyond the PL top six it's turned into a free-for-all for the rest of the Prem and most of the Championship, regardless of the "size" of the club. How come? Very good post š You're right, it seems counter intuitive. Money and parachute payments should mean yoyo teams up then down, yet some big teams sit in the Championship Let's hope if we go down we work out how to resolve this conundrum š¬š
|
|
|
Post by andystokey on Mar 7, 2018 19:05:29 GMT
The financial risk taking to stay in the league becomes too onerous over time and beyond most newly promoted clubs.
But more importantly FFP favours all those that can either win big (Leicester) or started at the PL trough with more than Ā£200m turnover. I think Leicester being the first team to break into the elite turnover (Ā£250 m +) thanks to a league title and a Champions league TV revenue higher than Real Madrid as winners.
We've had a good run, but we spent badly our Ā£50m extra a year on wages and fees. Top clubs with higher turnover can afford more financial failures than us. The last two seasons we've spent atrociously and the squad atrophy is shocking. Southampton for different reasons have asset stripped to the point of suicide.
|
|
|
Post by nonameface on Mar 7, 2018 19:11:03 GMT
I can't quite get my head round this... if and when Baggies and us drop this year, the longest-established team in the Prem outside the "big" seven (including Everton) will be Swansea. To put that in context that means that outside those big seven, every team currently in the Prem has been promoted to the division since we played in the FA Cup final. And since we were promoted, the 12 other PL spots have been occupied by twenty-eight different teams, with not one of them ever-present over that ten-year spell. Two-thirds of the top flight seems to have become a conveyor belt of teams of very modest size and history - many of whom were making their first appearance in the top flight for a very long time, or ever - Swansea, Watford, Bournemouth, Burnley, Huddersfield, Palace... then there's us, Baggies, Leicester, Saints - it would be no surprise if any of those disappeared soon (most of them could still go down this season). In recent years we've had Hull, Blackpool, Norwich, Birmingham... and Derby, Bristol City, Preston and Sheff U are all in with a chance of the play-off spot for next year. Is this a normal turnover for two-thirds of the teams in the top division? Meanwhile lots of traditionally big and succesful(-ish) teams have been relegated or languish in the lower divisions - Forest, Villa, Derby, Sheff Wed, Leeds, Sunderland... (there are more major trophy-winning teams in the Champo than there are in the Prem). When the Prem TV revenue ballooned (and parachute payments for relegated teams with it), the received wisdom was that PL teams would strengthen their grip on the places at the top table and it would become harder and harder for smaller teams to break into. But if anything the contrary has happened - beyond the PL top six it's turned into a free-for-all for the rest of the Prem and most of the Championship, regardless of the "size" of the club. How come? Good post. Completely would have thought parachute payments would have meant it was harder to get into, the reality appears that clubs cant recover from underperforming players on large contracts whilst the rest of the championship standard is raised. I'm really concerned if we do go down what financial damage will be done and what we will do to get rid of the likes of berahino, Imbula etc
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Mar 7, 2018 19:14:57 GMT
Concerning isn't it
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Mar 7, 2018 19:25:20 GMT
too many money grabbing wasters take you down and then your saddled with half of them who arent up for the fight to go back up The sooner this tv money bubble bursts the better
|
|
|
Post by basingstokie on Mar 7, 2018 19:50:00 GMT
too many money grabbing wasters take you down and then your saddled with half of them who arent up for the fight to go back up The sooner this tv money bubble bursts the better I think that's probably the issue, the gap between income in the prem and the champ is so massive (even with parachute payments) and over time the 'lower wages if we go down' clauses in contracts are removed or the club get to a stage where they are attracting players who wouldn't accept a clause (eg shaqiri) so when the club does go down it is saddled with players who cost a lot, but are underperforming (hence relegation) and high wages. Everyone knows the club is screwed so the vultures descend looking for bargains. They gave to let players go cheap and often make up their wages.
|
|
|
Post by Kenilworth_Stokies on Mar 7, 2018 20:13:59 GMT
Maybe it's that the Premiership TV revenues keep climbing after every new TV deal.
Relegated clubs find themselves with former Premiership wages but with Championship incomes. Meanwhile the newly promoted teams now have New TV Deal premiership revenues, leapfrogging them in both position and income.
Hence, you get this constant tumbledryer churn of rising and falling teams who never quite recover while another team takes their place for a few years.
Rinse and repeat, as they say.
|
|
|
Post by potterblade on Mar 7, 2018 20:17:27 GMT
Simple truth is money doesn't buy all the qualities you need in a player. Big wages and long contracts do NOT guarantee commitment to the cause, quite the opposite in many cases as we are sadly finding out.
Technically gifted expensive players don't offer value unless there is already a very strong team spirit and a clear mission about the club that goes beyond treading water above the relegation zone to guarantee another years inflated wages. The top 6 have this. The rest of us don't.
|
|
|
Post by SamB_SCFC on Mar 7, 2018 20:37:56 GMT
The contracts that Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino are on really concern me if we go down. No one is going to buy them and we're going to be stuck with them till the final day of their contracts. They'll never get the same money again so the bone idle twats will just sit it out bleeding the club dry.
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Mar 7, 2018 21:12:28 GMT
The contracts that Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino are on really concern me if we go down. No one is going to buy them and we're going to be stuck with them till the final day of their contracts. They'll never get the same money again so the bone idle twats will just sit it out bleeding the club dry. and Bojan is tied up for a few years as well.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2018 23:43:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 6:03:22 GMT
Simple truth is money doesn't buy all the qualities you need in a player. Big wages and long contracts do NOT guarantee commitment to the cause, quite the opposite in many cases as we are sadly finding out. Technically gifted expensive players don't offer value unless there is already a very strong team spirit and a clear mission about the club that goes beyond treading water above the relegation zone to guarantee another years inflated wages. It's interesting to see that the last few seasons, barring Berahino, our poor buys have all been foreign (Imbula, Wimmer, Wollscheid) trying to fill the ranks of homegrown talent (Walters, Whelan and to a degree Huth due to his familiarity with English football) Hopefully if the worst happens we'll recruit young, homegrown talent and give the youth team much needed experience
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 7:08:32 GMT
Simple truth is money doesn't buy all the qualities you need in a player. Big wages and long contracts do NOT guarantee commitment to the cause, quite the opposite in many cases as we are sadly finding out. Technically gifted expensive players don't offer value unless there is already a very strong team spirit and a clear mission about the club that goes beyond treading water above the relegation zone to guarantee another years inflated wages. It's interesting to see that the last few seasons, barring Berahino, our poor buys have all been foreign (Imbula, Wimmer, Wollscheid) trying to fill the ranks of homegrown talent (Walters, Whelan and to a degree Huth due to his familiarity with English football) Hopefully if the worst happens we'll recruit young, homegrown talent and give the youth team much needed experience Iām not sure how you can put Wollscheid in with the other three considering the fee in question, the fact that he was one of our lowest earners and the performance of the team when he was part of it......
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 7:17:04 GMT
I've always had a feeling that if you're not Top 6/7, then you're just one of the rest, and your time will eventually come re: relegation. So, it's only a matter of time.
That's not to say that you can't do everything within your power to stave relegation off, which we've spectacularly failed at.
|
|
|
Post by potterblade on Mar 8, 2018 8:34:51 GMT
Simple truth is money doesn't buy all the qualities you need in a player. Big wages and long contracts do NOT guarantee commitment to the cause, quite the opposite in many cases as we are sadly finding out. Technically gifted expensive players don't offer value unless there is already a very strong team spirit and a clear mission about the club that goes beyond treading water above the relegation zone to guarantee another years inflated wages. It's interesting to see that the last few seasons, barring Berahino, our poor buys have all been foreign (Imbula, Wimmer, Wollscheid) trying to fill the ranks of homegrown talent (Walters, Whelan and to a degree Huth due to his familiarity with English football) Hopefully if the worst happens we'll recruit young, homegrown talent and give the youth team much needed experience Not necessarily about nationality but those three TP signings were exactly the kind of gritty characters we failed to sign under Hughes and now we are paying the price. As much as I liked Wolly (I did, honestly) he was no replacement for Huth. His transfer to Leicester and the loss of Nzonzi and Bego is where it all started going wrong. We have looked spineless ever since.
|
|
|
Post by cousindupree on Mar 8, 2018 9:18:34 GMT
Self-sufficiency delivers you relegation eventually. The top 6 are immune to this thanks to mega rich owners and huge income streams. They can buy their way out of trouble and attract the best managers. Everton have managed, albeit a couple of times by the skin of their teeth, to stay in the prem which is a heck of an achievement considering until recently it was just Kenwright who isn't mega rich. We have also for 10 years bucked the trend thanks to Bet 365 cash injection and a couple of astute managerial appointments. But we have been in decline for a couple of years and the transfer spend didn't happen in the last few windows and we didn't refresh the management team and recruitment team which should happen at least as a maximum every 4 years and we are now looking at the trapdoor. The future of the prem looks like its only going to continue to go one way... Strong 6 dominating the league and the cups and the rest bit part players or at worse cannon fodder. To be honest it's becoming uncompetitive and a tad 'groundhog' day every season. I am slowly falling out of love with football at this level.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 8, 2018 9:52:49 GMT
They should have put in some sort of salary cap for team or individuals with exemptions (like mls) 25 years ago. That might have reigned wages in. Too late now
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Mar 8, 2018 10:01:46 GMT
They should have put in some sort of salary cap for team or individuals with exemptions (like mls) 25 years ago. That might have reigned wages in. Too late now Absolutely, being an NHL fan it definitely opens up the league more as it does in most North American sports. I mean you still get your perennial contenders but for me that smacks more of good recruitment and scouting teams etc. The argument I've found against Salary Caps is that it creates "artificial competition", my retort would be that the disparity between club incomes effectively kills ANY relevant competition. But as you say, it's far too late now how can you cap Sanchez'salary at Man U in fair terms for the rest of the league without knocking about 70% of his wages off?
|
|
|
Post by estrangedsonoffaye on Mar 8, 2018 10:05:51 GMT
I can't quite get my head round this... if and when Baggies and us drop this year, the longest-established team in the Prem outside the "big" seven (including Everton) will be Swansea. To put that in context that means that outside those big seven, every team currently in the Prem has been promoted to the division since we played in the FA Cup final. And since we were promoted, the 12 other PL spots have been occupied by twenty-eight different teams, with not one of them ever-present over that ten-year spell. Two-thirds of the top flight seems to have become a conveyor belt of teams of very modest size and history - many of whom were making their first appearance in the top flight for a very long time, or ever - Swansea, Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Huddersfield, Palace... then there's us, Baggies, Leicester, Saints - it would be no surprise if any of those disappeared soon (most of them could still go down this season). In recent years we've had Hull, Cardiff, Blackpool, Norwich, Birmingham... and Derby, Bristol City, Preston and Sheff U are all in with a chance of the play-off spot for next year. Is this a normal turnover for two-thirds of the teams in the top division? Meanwhile lots of traditionally big and succesful(-ish) teams have been relegated or languish in the lower divisions - Forest, Villa, Derby, Sheff Wed, Leeds, Sunderland... (there are more major trophy-winning teams in the Champo than there are in the Prem). When the Prem TV revenue ballooned (and parachute payments for relegated teams with it), the received wisdom was that PL teams would strengthen their grip on the places at the top table and it would become harder and harder for smaller teams to break into. But if anything the contrary has happened - beyond the PL top six it's turned into a free-for-all for the rest of the Prem and most of the Championship, regardless of the "size" of the club. How come? At nearly every PL club that's gone down from that list of established Top flight clubs there has been some kind of crisis of lack of leadership, I think this resembles our current situation very strongly. You've been up for 10 years, you know what's what, you're big enough to splash some cash and can get a bit lax on training and organisation because you know what you need to do to get 40 points.....then you play the better organised, better motivated, better trained, better assembled upstarts and you find yourself struggling. Villa, Sunderland, Forest, Sheff Wed, Derby were all shit for years before their long top flight spells ended, Leeds were terribly managed financially with Risdale staking it all on the Champions League. I'd throw Blackburn in here too, they had it all with Walkers money and were down within a couple of years after their title win. Funny old game.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 8, 2018 10:55:59 GMT
They should have put in some sort of salary cap for team or individuals with exemptions (like mls) 25 years ago. That might have reigned wages in. Too late now Absolutely, being an NHL fan it definitely opens up the league more as it does in most North American sports. I mean you still get your perennial contenders but for me that smacks more of good recruitment and scouting teams etc. The argument I've found against Salary Caps is that it creates "artificial competition", my retort would be that the disparity between club incomes effectively kills ANY relevant competition. But as you say, it's far too late now how can you cap Sanchez'salary at Man U in fair terms for the rest of the league without knocking about 70% of his wages off? I believe John Barnes became the first 10k a week player in this country. Liverpool were dominant then was the time for the FA to do something about it. When the gang of 6 dreamed up the premier league in the early 90s they just wanted to make as much money for their clubs. Obscene Salaries were probably not discussed but now have become a price of that success. As said we all hope the tv eventually goes bust and it opens up a degree of parity. We have good players in this league but Too many mediocre foreigners no better than British have took huge amounts of money from the English game.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 8, 2018 10:58:30 GMT
I can't quite get my head round this... if and when Baggies and us drop this year, the longest-established team in the Prem outside the "big" seven (including Everton) will be Swansea. To put that in context that means that outside those big seven, every team currently in the Prem has been promoted to the division since we played in the FA Cup final. And since we were promoted, the 12 other PL spots have been occupied by twenty-eight different teams, with not one of them ever-present over that ten-year spell. Two-thirds of the top flight seems to have become a conveyor belt of teams of very modest size and history - many of whom were making their first appearance in the top flight for a very long time, or ever - Swansea, Watford, Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Huddersfield, Palace... then there's us, Baggies, Leicester, Saints - it would be no surprise if any of those disappeared soon (most of them could still go down this season). In recent years we've had Hull, Cardiff, Blackpool, Norwich, Birmingham... and Derby, Bristol City, Preston and Sheff U are all in with a chance of the play-off spot for next year. Is this a normal turnover for two-thirds of the teams in the top division? Meanwhile lots of traditionally big and succesful(-ish) teams have been relegated or languish in the lower divisions - Forest, Villa, Derby, Sheff Wed, Leeds, Sunderland... (there are more major trophy-winning teams in the Champo than there are in the Prem). When the Prem TV revenue ballooned (and parachute payments for relegated teams with it), the received wisdom was that PL teams would strengthen their grip on the places at the top table and it would become harder and harder for smaller teams to break into. But if anything the contrary has happened - beyond the PL top six it's turned into a free-for-all for the rest of the Prem and most of the Championship, regardless of the "size" of the club. How come? At nearly every PL club that's gone down from that list of established Top flight clubs there has been some kind of crisis of lack of leadership, I think this resembles our current situation very strongly. You've been up for 10 years, you know what's what, you're big enough to splash some cash and can get a bit lax on training and organisation because you know what you need to do to get 40 points.....then you play the better organised, better motivated, better trained, better assembled upstarts and you find yourself struggling. Villa, Sunderland, Forest, Sheff Wed, Derby were all shit for years before their long top flight spells ended, Leeds were terribly managed financially with Risdale staking it all on the Champions League. I'd throw Blackburn in here too, they had it all with Walkers money and were down within a couple of years after their title win. Funny old game. You are right about those teams. But I think we are reasonably well run compared to those teams and you could argue we only have had two years of Devine since the promotion When we stay up there has to be some serious soul searching and correction in the summer. Learn from this seasons failing
|
|
|
Post by stokemark on Mar 8, 2018 11:03:12 GMT
Absolutely, being an NHL fan it definitely opens up the league more as it does in most North American sports. I mean you still get your perennial contenders but for me that smacks more of good recruitment and scouting teams etc. The argument I've found against Salary Caps is that it creates "artificial competition", my retort would be that the disparity between club incomes effectively kills ANY relevant competition. But as you say, it's far too late now how can you cap Sanchez'salary at Man U in fair terms for the rest of the league without knocking about 70% of his wages off? I believe John Barnes became the first 10k a week player in this country. Liverpool were dominant then was the time for the FA to do something about it. When the gang of 6 dreamed up the premier league in the early 90s they just wanted to make as much money for their clubs. Obscene Salaries were probably not discussed but now have become a price of that success. As said we all hope the tv eventually goes bust and it opens up a degree of parity. We have good players in this league but Too many mediocre foreigners no better than British have took huge amounts of money from the English game. You do realise that 'TV going bust' will actually further remove parity as the big clubs will sell their rights direct to their customers (global glory hunters) via the internet There are plenty of mediocre British players around too milking the gravy train but I suppose that's alright is it ?
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 8, 2018 11:12:18 GMT
I believe John Barnes became the first 10k a week player in this country. Liverpool were dominant then was the time for the FA to do something about it. When the gang of 6 dreamed up the premier league in the early 90s they just wanted to make as much money for their clubs. Obscene Salaries were probably not discussed but now have become a price of that success. As said we all hope the tv eventually goes bust and it opens up a degree of parity. We have good players in this league but Too many mediocre foreigners no better than British have took huge amounts of money from the English game. You do realise that 'TV going bust' will actually further remove parity as the big clubs will sell their rights direct to their customers (global glory hunters) via the internet There are plenty of mediocre British players around too milking the gravy train but I suppose that's alright is it ? no But why import mediocrity when we have enough of it here English clubs rarely buy the world superstars in their prime. They buy them young or largely unproven then develop them and flog them to Spain.
|
|
|
Post by SamB_SCFC on Mar 8, 2018 17:58:53 GMT
The contracts that Wimmer, Imbula and Berahino are on really concern me if we go down. No one is going to buy them and we're going to be stuck with them till the final day of their contracts. They'll never get the same money again so the bone idle twats will just sit it out bleeding the club dry. and Bojan is tied up for a few years as well. At least Bojan might be useful in The Championship. He's very lightweight but the sheer amount of quality he possesses should come in useful. Imbula would probably do well too if we could persuade him to turn out. Berahino and Wimmer though are absolute dead losses.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 19:29:50 GMT
It's interesting to see that the last few seasons, barring Berahino, our poor buys have all been foreign (Imbula, Wimmer, Wollscheid) trying to fill the ranks of homegrown talent (Walters, Whelan and to a degree Huth due to his familiarity with English football) Hopefully if the worst happens we'll recruit young, homegrown talent and give the youth team much needed experience Iām not sure how you can put Wollscheid in with the other three considering the fee in question, the fact that he was one of our lowest earners and the performance of the team when he was part of it...... It was more in the way of bad purchases who didn't fit, although at first I thought he was excellent and cultured, as you say not a big earner but ended up being shipped out
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2018 19:32:40 GMT
It's interesting to see that the last few seasons, barring Berahino, our poor buys have all been foreign (Imbula, Wimmer, Wollscheid) trying to fill the ranks of homegrown talent (Walters, Whelan and to a degree Huth due to his familiarity with English football) Hopefully if the worst happens we'll recruit young, homegrown talent and give the youth team much needed experience Not necessarily about nationality but those three TP signings were exactly the kind of gritty characters we failed to sign under Hughes and now we are paying the price. As much as I liked Wolly (I did, honestly) he was no replacement for Huth. His transfer to Leicester and the loss of Nzonzi and Bego is where it all started going wrong. We have looked spineless ever since. Agreed there and well spotted. This season seems to be the loss of Arnautovic and replaced by Cheapo-Mounting that hammered the nails in the coffin, as much as I refused to believe it and be positive to the point of lunacy š
|
|
|
Post by pearo on Mar 9, 2018 19:23:51 GMT
Part of the problem with relegation is that whilst clubs get a parachute payment, most players have a sell off clause in their contract if their club goes down. What happens then is that the newly promoted and barely survived teams snap up these players, leaving relegated teams with the dross players that no one wants and lots of money to waste on average players in the hope of gaining promotion.
In these days of mega buck salaries you will never get the older quality players whose legs have gone a little stepping down a division to see out their career, like we saw with Kendall and Doyle in late 70ās, early 80ās, even your average Prem player is now a multi millionaire.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on May 10, 2018 20:42:05 GMT
So in the end it turns out that the three teams going down are the three longest-serving clubs outside of the "big 7", and next year the entirety of the bottom half and upper mid-table Prem will have been promoted to the division during the last six years.
|
|