Where do we go from here?

Joseph Paxton said:
Yes, Brighton relied on Tony Bloom's arcane statistical modelling, uncovered overlooked players, developed them over several seasons and then sold them on at a remarkable profit. The envy of many in the PL, including us trying to beat them at that very data-driven game.

BUT, if you look closely at the Brighton model they actually seeded the squad with very experienced, canny and proven Prem troopers like Milner, Lallana and Wellbeck who was so well deployed that he has gone on to Chelsea at 35. I think we are missing a trick. We had a problem a few seasons back with an ageing squad and now we seem to have gone the other way, losing a lot of experience in looking for young blood to develop and then flog. I don't think I'm going all Alan Hansen when I worry about lack of Premiership experience in the team now.

Let's not forget, Milner was 40 when he retired this summer. It gets overlooked how Brighton structure and balance the team.
Click to expand...
Some other things people overlook about Brighton....

Firstly, they spend (sometimes waste) a fair bit of money on players who don't develop as hoped. So much so that they flew incredibly close to the wind with FFP for a time, to the point where there was talk of an Everton-type big fine, points deduction, transfer ban etc. They got off the hook because Chelsea went through a phase of paying megabucks for anything and anyone that wasn't nailed down at Brighton. Without that, their celebrated model would have hit the skids.

Some might say that selling to big clubs is the model in action, but Chelsea only had the money to give Brighton because they were breaching FFP (subsequently discovered) and, more importantly, were able to sell a load of expensive flops of their own to middle Eastern clubs who have now pulled the plug in those kinds of deals. In other words, a unique set of circumstances that couldn't be predicted and won't be repeated.

They do a very good job down there, and I'm not being uncharitable. It is important to note, however, that nothing they do is guaranteed to work. There is no 'right' way.

Secondly, they have a squad in which half the players don't see Brighton as their final destination (as Parish puts it). We have seen how well motivated they are by personal career ambitions when things going well, but have yet to see how they all react when the chips are seriously down. Ask Southampton or Leicester if their saleable assets fought hard for them when it got tough. I think you'll find they just protected themselves when they realised the club would have to sell them after relegation.

Third, they've won nothing. We are talking about top ten finishes and the lower reaches of Europe every now and again. That's the 'prize' is it? The final aim? To hear some people talk, especially in the media, you'd think Brighton were winning trophies. It's tempting to say they've done nothing we haven't done, but put it like this: They've done nothing Southampton didn't do. Or Burnley. Worth remembering that.

Finally, this mind-blowing, genius model is that you sell your best players to the teams above you. All the time. You actually aim to strengthen the teams you would otherwise hope to catch. The more successful your are, the more you reinforce your lesser position. We just take it for granted now, but years ago that would have been beyond the pale, the last thing you'd ever want to do. Brighton are something to aspire to up to a certain point, but after that they are part of the problem.

In terms of where we go from here, I'd think long and hard before copying the Brighton approach.
 
TheBigToePunt said:
...

In terms of where we go from here, I'd think long and hard before copying the Brighton approach.
Click to expand...
The one thing I was thinking was what it must be like for their younger fans who get attached to a player only to see them sold 5 minutes later. Unless they love Dunk (is that possible?), it must be tough, as hardly any of their good players stick around for more than a couple of seasons. We at least seem to get a few seasons out of our best players.

I agree with a lot of what you say, but I think they have created a solid model for the size of club they are. Like us, they are never going to be able to sustain any significant success, as eventually the big clubs will always buy you out, so the hope is you hang in there and occasionally have a good cup run or flirt with European qualification. There is currently this weird situation where if fans of both sides were honest, they both have reasons to be envious; we'd like a better scouting setup and more of a structure, and they'd like our trophies. The difference is, if we got relegated we'd have the memories of something meaningful, whereas if they got relegated they'd only have memories of being part of the 'brilliant 3 Bs' and all the trophies those clubs have.

Brighton have started brilliantly, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if their last couple of disappointing results put a chink in their armour and they drop more points. (At least I hope so!!)
 
TheBigToePunt said:
Some other things people overlook about Brighton....

Firstly, they spend (sometimes waste) a fair bit of money on players who don't develop as hoped. So much so that they flew incredibly close to the wind with FFP for a time, to the point where there was talk of an Everton-type big fine, points deduction, transfer ban etc. They got off the hook because Chelsea went through a phase of paying megabucks for anything and anyone that wasn't nailed down at Brighton. Without that, their celebrated model would have hit the skids.

Some might say that selling to big clubs is the model in action, but Chelsea only had the money to give Brighton because they were breaching FFP (subsequently discovered) and, more importantly, were able to sell a load of expensive flops of their own to middle Eastern clubs who have now pulled the plug in those kinds of deals. In other words, a unique set of circumstances that couldn't be predicted and won't be repeated.

They do a very good job down there, and I'm not being uncharitable. It is important to note, however, that nothing they do is guaranteed to work. There is no 'right' way.

Secondly, they have a squad in which half the players don't see Brighton as their final destination (as Parish puts it). We have seen how well motivated they are by personal career ambitions when things going well, but have yet to see how they all react when the chips are seriously down. Ask Southampton or Leicester if their saleable assets fought hard for them when it got tough. I think you'll find they just protected themselves when they realised the club would have to sell them after relegation.

Third, they've won nothing. We are talking about top ten finishes and the lower reaches of Europe every now and again. That's the 'prize' is it? The final aim? To hear some people talk, especially in the media, you'd think Brighton were winning trophies. It's tempting to say they've done nothing we haven't done, but put it like this: They've done nothing Southampton didn't do. Or Burnley. Worth remembering that.

Finally, this mind-blowing, genius model is that you sell your best players to the teams above you. All the time. You actually aim to strengthen the teams you would otherwise hope to catch. The more successful your are, the more you reinforce your lesser position. We just take it for granted now, but years ago that would have been beyond the pale, the last thing you'd ever want to do. Brighton are something to aspire to up to a certain point, but after that they are part of the problem.

In terms of where we go from here, I'd think long and hard before copying the Brighton approach.
Click to expand...
All good points. Not all Brighton fans are keen on their approach either.

www.wearebrighton.com

The definitive list of Brighton players and staff signed by Chelsea

WAB brings to you the definitive and lengthy list of Brighton players, staff and others with Albion connections signed by Chelsea since 2022
www.wearebrighton.com www.wearebrighton.com
 
taylors lovechild said:
The one thing I was thinking was what it must be like for their younger fans who get attached to a player only to see them sold 5 minutes later. Unless they love Dunk (is that possible?), it must be tough, as hardly any of their good players stick around for more than a couple of seasons.
Click to expand...
You can multiply that across the premier league it seems to me. That's why so many games are so generic. Teams don't have the same discernable personality they once did, as all the cast members are rotating around interchangeably.

It's not football.
 
TheBigToePunt said:
You can multiply that across the premier league it seems to me. That's why so many games are so generic. Teams don't have the same discernable personality they once did, as all the cast members are rotating around interchangeably.

It's not football.
Click to expand...
No it doesn't. As Jerry Seinfeld said about American football the players don't matter to the fans. They support the shirt so basically they're cheering for laundry.
 
TheBigToePunt said:
Some other things people overlook about Brighton....

Firstly, they spend (sometimes waste) a fair bit of money on players who don't develop as hoped. So much so that they flew incredibly close to the wind with FFP for a time, to the point where there was talk of an Everton-type big fine, points deduction, transfer ban etc. They got off the hook because Chelsea went through a phase of paying megabucks for anything and anyone that wasn't nailed down at Brighton. Without that, their celebrated model would have hit the skids.

Some might say that selling to big clubs is the model in action, but Chelsea only had the money to give Brighton because they were breaching FFP (subsequently discovered) and, more importantly, were able to sell a load of expensive flops of their own to middle Eastern clubs who have now pulled the plug in those kinds of deals. In other words, a unique set of circumstances that couldn't be predicted and won't be repeated.

They do a very good job down there, and I'm not being uncharitable. It is important to note, however, that nothing they do is guaranteed to work. There is no 'right' way.

Secondly, they have a squad in which half the players don't see Brighton as their final destination (as Parish puts it). We have seen how well motivated they are by personal career ambitions when things going well, but have yet to see how they all react when the chips are seriously down. Ask Southampton or Leicester if their saleable assets fought hard for them when it got tough. I think you'll find they just protected themselves when they realised the club would have to sell them after relegation.

Third, they've won nothing. We are talking about top ten finishes and the lower reaches of Europe every now and again. That's the 'prize' is it? The final aim? To hear some people talk, especially in the media, you'd think Brighton were winning trophies. It's tempting to say they've done nothing we haven't done, but put it like this: They've done nothing Southampton didn't do. Or Burnley. Worth remembering that.

Finally, this mind-blowing, genius model is that you sell your best players to the teams above you. All the time. You actually aim to strengthen the teams you would otherwise hope to catch. The more successful your are, the more you reinforce your lesser position. We just take it for granted now, but years ago that would have been beyond the pale, the last thing you'd ever want to do. Brighton are something to aspire to up to a certain point, but after that they are part of the problem.

In terms of where we go from here, I'd think long and hard before copying the Brighton approach.
Click to expand...
Brighton are Media Darlings. So you never get to hear about those '' expensive flops '' in the Press.

As for copying their model, I think they are/were ahead of their time in their data led analysis of players. That's now become a ' thing ' - every top club now has data analysts . Not all clubs of course want to monetise their signings in the way that Brighton have and continue to do. Brentford, whose owner worked with Tony Bloom, have adopted the same operating model, with similar success.

You're right, they aren't a '' destination club ''. And like Palace, probably never will be for the top players.

However, they do have a number of advantages over Palace. One committed owner that has bankrolled them. And then employed the expertise to take care of the football side of their operation, eg. Dan Ashworth and now Paul Barber. They were able to move to a new stadium which generates more money than Palace can at Selhurst. Not that I envy them that, Falmer is a nightmare to get to and from. But that's the platform from which I believe they are a far better run club than Palace.

No, they haven't won anything. Yet. But ask yourself if you thought two years ago, when we went until October until winning a league game, that we would win the FA Cup, Community Shield and then the Conference League ? And then ask yourself, as things currently stand, who has a better chance of winning something this season ? They could and should win the Conference League.

I don't know what Brighton's aspirations are. I suspect that they are quite happy to take the likes of Chelsea's money in the knowledge that they can be regular interlopers into the higher reaches of the league without ever becoming a top six club.

So far this season Brighton have been playing to a very high standard. Let's see if they can sustain it. Losing at the weekend may bring them down a peg or two. Let's hope so !
 
Last time I looked Brighton owed hundreds of millions to Bloom, they are luck to have an owner like that. Would the model work if Brighton was run by Steve Parish (No I don't mean he run it into the ground deliberately).
 
NEILLO said:
...

No, they haven't won anything. Yet. But ask yourself if you thought two years ago, when we went until October until winning a league game, that we would win the FA Cup, Community Shield and then the Conference League ? And then ask yourself, as things currently stand, who has a better chance of winning something this season ? They could and should win the Conference League.

...

So far this season Brighton have been playing to a very high standard. Let's see if they can sustain it. Losing at the weekend may bring them down a peg or two. Let's hope so !
Click to expand...
Although Brighton are favourites, I do think the competition is perhaps slightly stiffer this season, with Freiburg currently third in the Bundesliga, and Monaco, Ajax and Atlanta being experienced in Europe.
 
NEILLO said:
Brighton are Media Darlings. So you never get to hear about those '' expensive flops '' in the Press.

As for copying their model, I think they are/were ahead of their time in their data led analysis of players. That's now become a ' thing ' - every top club now has data analysts . Not all clubs of course want to monetise their signings in the way that Brighton have and continue to do. Brentford, whose owner worked with Tony Bloom, have adopted the same operating model, with similar success.

You're right, they aren't a '' destination club ''. And like Palace, probably never will be for the top players.

However, they do have a number of advantages over Palace. One committed owner that has bankrolled them. And then employed the expertise to take care of the football side of their operation, eg. Dan Ashworth and now Paul Barber. They were able to move to a new stadium which generates more money than Palace can at Selhurst. Not that I envy them that, Falmer is a nightmare to get to and from. But that's the platform from which I believe they are a far better run club than Palace.

No, they haven't won anything. Yet. But ask yourself if you thought two years ago, when we went until October until winning a league game, that we would win the FA Cup, Community Shield and then the Conference League ? And then ask yourself, as things currently stand, who has a better chance of winning something this season ? They could and should win the Conference League.

I don't know what Brighton's aspirations are. I suspect that they are quite happy to take the likes of Chelsea's money in the knowledge that they can be regular interlopers into the higher reaches of the league without ever becoming a top six club.

So far this season Brighton have been playing to a very high standard. Let's see if they can sustain it. Losing at the weekend may bring them down a peg or two. Let's hope so !
Click to expand...
Lots of interesting points on Brighton model and how they may fare this season. True that they have not won anything yet but it only seems like yesterday to me that I was casting a hex on them and hoping they dropped to non-league football in 1997! 30 years...as sand runs through my fingers!

One of the points i make in comparison to them is that we do not seem to put a premium on experience and seasoned players from the Prem in our squad. We hung on to reliable Wardy and he became a defensive talisman when we had need to rotate and cover. But I would say retention of experienced players has dropped away, we seem to want to sign young 'potential' talent for development - some will not make the grade, like Brighton et al - YET what we appear to have totally outlawed is signing experienced player over 30 years old: notably unlike Brighton.

With a bit of AI research I believe we have signed only 2 players over 30 in the last decade: Gary Cahill and Flamini, both as free agents (and a nod to Guaita but he was GK).
You can see other clubs don't employ such a strict threshold. I think it leads to a lack of leadership nous throughout the team. We could do with a Sgt Rock in our current squad.
 
Joseph Paxton said:
Lots of interesting points on Brighton model and how they may fare this season. True that they have not won anything yet but it only seems like yesterday to me that I was casting a hex on them and hoping they dropped to non-league football in 1997! 30 years...as sand runs through my fingers!

One of the points i make in comparison to them is that we do not seem to put a premium on experience and seasoned players from the Prem in our squad. We hung on to reliable Wardy and he became a defensive talisman when we had need to rotate and cover. But I would say retention of experienced players has dropped away, we seem to want to sign young 'potential' talent for development - some will not make the grade, like Brighton et al - YET what we appear to have totally outlawed is signing experienced player over 30 years old: notably unlike Brighton.

With a bit of AI research I believe we have signed only 2 players over 30 in the last decade: Gary Cahill and Flamini, both as free agents (and a nod to Guaita but he was GK).
You can see other clubs don't employ such a strict threshold. I think it leads to a lack of leadership nous throughout the team. We could do with a Sgt Rock in our current squad.
Click to expand...
Chelsea in pre-season signed seasoned 'veterans' Welbeck and Henderson.
Brighton re-signed Gross, Tottenham signed Robertson.
Sunderland last season signed Xhaka.
 
The way forward is to play effective football capable of obtaining results in the Premier League
The evidence would suggest that this is not possible under Sage, even if it's attractive in spells.
I can only think of Pep's team who pushed as many players forward and succeeded, and they had world class players who dominated possession and pinned teams in their own half.

Being effective for clubs our size can be achieved in different ways.

Under Pulis it meant 4 solid defenders, 2 workhorse midfielders, no fannying it around at the back, Jerome who had the pace and strength to run the channels for long passes supported by the pace and flair of Bolassie and Puncheon.
All told an effective unit capable of punching above it's weight.

Under Roy it meant minimising gaps in our defensive third, with our players compact leaving few places for the opposition to exploit.
Again, largely effective even if not the most attractive to watch.

Under Glasner it was mostly a defensive formation which could be devastatingly effective in transition .

What these managers all had in common was a solid foundation with players knowing their exact roles, and in the main executing them well.

Under Sage we continually leave our back 3 exposed either down the sides or directly in front of them with no protection.
It's not efficient, lacks discipline and we don't have the players to execute what Sage is trying to achieve.
 
PatrickA said:
The way forward is to play effective football capable of obtaining results in the Premier League
The evidence would suggest that this is not possible under Sage, even if it's attractive in spells.
I can only think of Pep's team who pushed as many players forward and succeeded, and they had world class players who dominated possession and pinned teams in their own half.

Being effective for clubs our size can be achieved in different ways.

Under Pulis it meant 4 solid defenders, 2 workhorse midfielders, no fannying it around at the back, Jerome who had the pace and strength to run the channels for long passes supported by the pace and flair of Bolassie and Puncheon.
All told an effective unit capable of punching above it's weight.

Under Roy it meant minimising gaps in our defensive third, with our players compact leaving few places for the opposition to exploit.
Again, largely effective even if not the most attractive to watch.

Under Glasner it was mostly a defensive formation which could be devastatingly effective in transition .

What these managers all had in common was a solid foundation with players knowing their exact roles, and in the main executing them well.

Under Sage we continually leave our back 3 exposed either down the sides or directly in front of them with no protection.
It's not efficient, lacks discipline and we don't have the players to execute what Sage is trying to achieve.
Click to expand...
The old cliché about the spine of the team applies to us. Goalkeeper? Currently the second choice. Central defence? Unsettled and lacking experience. Midfield? Unsettled and not combative enough. Strikers? Missing the first choice until recently and he's inconsistent. If any one of those components is misfiring it's difficult to form a cohesive unit - all four make it more or less impossible. Can the situation be rescued? The way things sit probably only with the hope three teams are in worse situations and/or selling Wharton for a fortune and reinvesting wisely - which doesn't seem likely.
 
PatrickA said:
The way forward is to play effective football capable of obtaining results in the Premier League
The evidence would suggest that this is not possible under Sage, even if it's attractive in spells.
I can only think of Pep's team who pushed as many players forward and succeeded, and they had world class players who dominated possession and pinned teams in their own half.

Being effective for clubs our size can be achieved in different ways.

Under Pulis it meant 4 solid defenders, 2 workhorse midfielders, no fannying it around at the back, Jerome who had the pace and strength to run the channels for long passes supported by the pace and flair of Bolassie and Puncheon.
All told an effective unit capable of punching above it's weight.

Under Roy it meant minimising gaps in our defensive third, with our players compact leaving few places for the opposition to exploit.
Again, largely effective even if not the most attractive to watch.

Under Glasner it was mostly a defensive formation which could be devastatingly effective in transition .

What these managers all had in common was a solid foundation with players knowing their exact roles, and in the main executing them well.

Under Sage we continually leave our back 3 exposed either down the sides or directly in front of them with no protection.
It's not efficient, lacks discipline and we don't have the players to execute what Sage is trying to achieve.
Click to expand...
I am sure it has been drilled into Sage that the problem under Glasner was that when we did gain possession, we did not have much of a clue what to do with it and if the opposition set up with a low block we had few attacking tools to pick the lock and set the net bulging.

Recently we seem to be able to get goals through a variety of players but left very exposed at the back with a poorly marshalled defence. Hendo please return!
 
bright&wright said:
Only Palace fans online could win 3 trophies after nothing for 100+ years and then within a few months cry "Why can't we be like Br*ghton!".

There hasn't been a day that I've thought we should be anything like that plastic, soulless club.
Click to expand...
Who is saying that then ?

I don't want to be like them but I do accept that they do some things better than we do. And likewise we do some things better than them.

You clearly disagree
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top