chris123
Member
- Location
- hove actually
- Country
England
Shame Jake O'brien slipped through
The business model
- Topic starter TheBigToePunt
- Start date
Inquisitive Aquila
Member
Having been on the ground tour today the question that struck me a lot was what if?
Yes we have a business model where we finish 12th or 11th and maybe if we are lucky sneak 10th, attracting players to play in the Premiership and if they prove good enough move on to bigger clubs.
Howwever, what if we were relegated? Surely there is a contingency plan in thse circumstances? Although the guide did tempt fate by saying we were unlikely to get relegated.
However, what if we do better than expected? Last season we achieved 53 points good enough for 12th but in other seasons 10th, 9th or even 8th which depending on quantity of European places and which teams win the cups could be good enough for Europe.
Last summer our signings were from outside the football league was this a consequence of football league clubs looking at us seeing our success and bumping up the price of players?
If we get priced out of buying the next Olise, Eze or Wharton will we have to rely on last summer buying players from abroad who may not adapt to the Premier league?
I think the danger is for all sporting teams there is greater chance of disruption, injuries for example not just volume but serious injuries to Doucoure and Riad which leaves them unavailable for years.
Yes we have a business model where we finish 12th or 11th and maybe if we are lucky sneak 10th, attracting players to play in the Premiership and if they prove good enough move on to bigger clubs.
Howwever, what if we were relegated? Surely there is a contingency plan in thse circumstances? Although the guide did tempt fate by saying we were unlikely to get relegated.
However, what if we do better than expected? Last season we achieved 53 points good enough for 12th but in other seasons 10th, 9th or even 8th which depending on quantity of European places and which teams win the cups could be good enough for Europe.
Last summer our signings were from outside the football league was this a consequence of football league clubs looking at us seeing our success and bumping up the price of players?
If we get priced out of buying the next Olise, Eze or Wharton will we have to rely on last summer buying players from abroad who may not adapt to the Premier league?
I think the danger is for all sporting teams there is greater chance of disruption, injuries for example not just volume but serious injuries to Doucoure and Riad which leaves them unavailable for years.
Excellent and timely post.
We knew it would, but the FA Cup success has changed what people view as achievable. Which is great, but this is not an every season thing. It was a once in a lifetime thing, but hopefully now as an established prem team, having a good cup run or league finish will be more regular.
The kick on, is a really difficult concept. Fans (and OG) expect it, but nobody really knows what does that....the easiest proxy is another couple of players. Lets say 25m a piece on 70k 5 year contracts, thats 80m outlay. Very easy for OG to get in a strop about. But what if one does their cruciate, or we just dont kick on. Are we in trouble?
When people say, we should be aiming for 8th instead of 12th. Commercially is that sensible? Last year 8th got £145.1m and 12th got £136.1m prize money. £10m is £10m but how much would it cost to go from 12th to 8th, I suspect a lot more than 10m.
Like it our not, Parish and the board will be looking at long term, sustainable growth.
The other thing that fans and OG lament is depth of squad. But spend aside, this isn't always straight forward. At present we are pretty threadbare (but have Sarr, Munoz, Nketiah, Kamada out), but we cant be signing top players to replace relatively short term injuries. We need to think about how new players work in context with the wider squad (and our finances). And who we can attract based on the playing time we are likely to be able to offer them.
For example: We've been longing for a RWB cover, but its a really difficult ask. Munoz (until now) has rarely missed a game, what caliber of player is going to be happy to come and sit on the bench for cover. I know what, Sosa caliber. Which is probably why we've stuck with Clyne. Whats the point of spending a transfer fee, plus 15m in wages for someone who isn't great and wont play very often.
So I know we'll rarely have a fully fit squad, but when we do, this is what we'd be looking like.
Hendo
Richards
Lacroix
Canvot
Munoz
Mitchel
Wharton
Kamada
Johnson
Sarr
Mateta
Benitez
Riad (hopefully)
Lerma
Hughes
Deveney
Uche
Pino
Nketiah
xxxxxxx
So we can throw around the phrase depth but its not that easy to achieve, without having to leave some players out of the matchday squad all together.
doombear
Member
- Location
- Too far from Selhurst Park
- Country
-
England
Far too sensible a post, Robbo.
Re RWB, both Cardines and Kporha were supposed to be the back-up for Munoz but, sadly, both now have long term injuries. The club couldn't have seen that coming back in the Summer. With Clyne also available at the beginning of the season it was reasonable for the board to think they had the position adequately covered.
We spent money in the Summer but the players who've come in haven't performed as hoped - none of them. This can happen and can lead to a dramatic fall - ask Southampton. We need to get our next investments right or we could follow the Saints back into the Championship.
I'm not criticising the model because we don't have any other viable option if we want to stay in the PL, but it is dependent on getting most calls right and we need the right person to be making those calls.
Re RWB, both Cardines and Kporha were supposed to be the back-up for Munoz but, sadly, both now have long term injuries. The club couldn't have seen that coming back in the Summer. With Clyne also available at the beginning of the season it was reasonable for the board to think they had the position adequately covered.
We spent money in the Summer but the players who've come in haven't performed as hoped - none of them. This can happen and can lead to a dramatic fall - ask Southampton. We need to get our next investments right or we could follow the Saints back into the Championship.
I'm not criticising the model because we don't have any other viable option if we want to stay in the PL, but it is dependent on getting most calls right and we need the right person to be making those calls.
Frickin Saweet
Member
- Location
- South Cronx
- Country
Togo
I agree that the signings we've made in the last year have really compounded the frustrations with where we are as a football club. We all know we're not going to keep players like Olise, Eze, Guehi and appreciate the time we have with them. However the recruitment to replace them has not been good enough. I don't see any of the new signings being significantly developed to be sold on for a profit as previous ones have. We don't have any flair players to get people off their feet (Bolasie, Zaha, Olise, Eze) and we don't have any academy/youth prospects that will do both of those things (Moses, Zaha, Clyne, Wan Bissika). As has happened over previous years. And I think that is what's frustrating manager and fans as well as how things are unfolding right now. Exciting youth prospects and flair players can at least make the trek to Selhurst worth it or give you hope that we're on a steady positive progression as a club.
Who is in charge of talent pipeline and recruitment now? I don't know and feel like we've lost our blueprint in that respect.
elgin eeagle
Member
- Country
Scotland
Very true. Doucore was also a big player before his injury. Him and Riad are unknown quantities now though. What it does prove however is those in the first team are always going to be in demand though, so we must avoid signing fillers, and be more harsh with the ones we have signed since Dougie left. I think we miss him most of all.
But to me, its just so obvious where we need to strengthen, canvot is young and there's no way a prem team should be starting a 19 year old at cb, we've only just sold Guehi so im guessing the club will be looking for a cb. Lerma is versatile, so a great player to have in the squad but I dont think him, Hughes or kamada are good enough to start, Devenny, I honestly belive he's the worst player in the prem, just dont get what glasner sees in him. Unfortunately we're stuck with uche and Nketiah, I dont think uche has been given a fair chance but Nketiah definitely can't lead the line and is terrible as a 10.
I completely forgot that we had Doucore. On a cool £3.64m a year. As harsh as it sounds, these type of situations are a big handbrake for us. Add the £1.5m for Riad, and £1.5 for Ahamada its quite a chunk of wasted money.
Palacesince64
Member
- Location
- Edinburgh
- Country
-
Scotland
The business model has served us well. It’s kept us afloat and mid table in the PL. It’s entertained us with good football and we’ve even won trophies. This season has been disappointing because we haven’t kicked on. I do think there has been a subtle change in our recruitment policy from where we were under Dougie. Suddenly we’re paying £20-30 + million for the likes of Nketiah and Johnson rather than £10 million for players from the Championship. We have a top class academy which seems to be about developing young players to sell to the championship but with n little opportunity to get into our first team. I think that has been an attempt to satisfy the demands of an ambitious manager who wasn’t prepared to play someone like Esse and who at most will allow academy players to sit on the bench and gain experience of the big game atmosphere but not feature on the field. Parish has done as much as he can within the financial rules and without risking the club’s future to keep the manager happy.
Next season has to be about getting back to the model on the field with players and off the field with the ground development. The new coach has to be someone who understands and accepts that reality, is prepared to develop players to be sold on, and is capable of working with the DoF to do so and to get as much value as possible out of our academy.
Next season has to be about getting back to the model on the field with players and off the field with the ground development. The new coach has to be someone who understands and accepts that reality, is prepared to develop players to be sold on, and is capable of working with the DoF to do so and to get as much value as possible out of our academy.
elgin eeagle
Member
- Country
-
Scotland
It really is. I know injuries are part and parcel and every side gets them, but when you have half the squad out including in key positions where you have no suitable cover, it's doubly tricky. Of course we did much better during the 20 match unbeaten run as the injuries were minimal during that period, despite the frequency of the matches.
As unrealistic for us and annoying as it is to say, Arsenal probably have the best squad in terms of quality beyond the first eleven, and seem to be a lot luckier with injuries despite having a similar amount of fixtures or even more. We obviously can't compete with them when our best player struggles to make their bench though.
Someone suggested getting Dougie back as manager/co manager and letting him sign his own players. It's not the worst suggestion is it. He rarely signed a dud. Ahamada and maybe a couple of others, but Eze and Olise particularly, we're inspired choices.
TheBigToePunt
Member
- Country
-
England
I had thought that it went without saying, but perhaps it doesn't always: The current business model (as it seems to me, anyway) is not necessarily the one that Parish has chosen ahead of other viable options. Rather it seems, by and large, to be the only viable option.
Parish talks from time to time, in great detail and very directly, about how football regulations are increasingly keeping clubs like Palace at arms length, preventing them from ever threatening the status quo. I don't see any reason to think that Parish wants us to be 12th per se. Its more that it becomes harder every year to get to 9th, 8th, or whatever 'progress' might look like. The clubs above get more and more money every time. Each season, they are lined up another few yards ahead of us when the starting gun goes off.
Also, the model is based not on what we think we might 'need', but on what we can actually do. For example, whilst I agree it was clear that we only had Munoz for the RWB position, that doesn't make another RWB who is anywhere near as good, and who wants to join us, from a club that is prepared to sell, suddenly become available in our price range. I'm sure the club were aware that Europe strains the squad depth beyond breaking point, but knowledge of that fact wouldn't have changed the sums or the budget. It also wouldn't have allowed us to take more risks with debt. FFP and PSR are even tighter in Europe, as others have pointed out.
For me, FFP and PSR are brilliant ideas, at least in principle. I hate the thought that a clubs status is linked not to how its people and supporters build it up together over time, but rather on which (often highly dubious) wealthy foreigner wakes up one day and decides to buy it. That Abramovich-type model runs contrary to decent values on all sorts of levels. Moreover, if that rich owner dies, or gets divorced, or bored, or his homeland government decide to put the squeeze on him, that 120 year old English football club suddenly goes to the wall. We have seen that so many times over the years, at every level. It is right and proper that clubs rely on themselves and not on a benefactor.
The problem is that when you add FFP/PSR to a system where the highest placed teams get far more income, partly as a result of being highest placed, than the middle-placed teams, it becomes impossible for the big boys to get overtaken in any lasting way. The rich get richer, and even if your owner happens to have the money and the will, you can't challenge them. Perhaps one day English football will adopt an American sports approach, where the lowest placed get some kind of advantage over the higher ones to keep the competition interesting (although that system has its problems). For now though, our business model is based on reality, rather than preference or timidity.
Finally, the business model (as I have described it, as if I know what I am talking about!) is based on reality as it exists today. It is an approach to trading. The vision for the club is a different thing. It seems a bit ironic to me that Parish is sometimes charged with a lack of ambition. When I hear him talk about turning Palace from a part of a top players journey into their destination instead, I think he is being hopelessly optimistic.
Redeveloping Selhurst, costs and debt aside, is supposed to give us a bit more income so we can do a bit more within FFP. The academy is supposed to generate a player here and there, and perhaps some profit, again so we can survive in FFP. These are the only cards that Palace can play, and even if both are a huge success we would only be keeping up with the mid-table Joneses, not gaining some big advantage.
The moral of it for me is to recognise the reality and see the clubs approach in that light, if only to stop from going insane individually, or to stop the wider fan base turning toxic. Look at Spurs or West Ham. Is that enjoyable? Is that what football is now? Instead of supporters, just tens of thousands of entitled, dissatisfied customers who think anyone in charge is a prick and take as much satisfaction from protesting as from the game itself. No thanks.
It is not natural to just take each game on its own terms, without any wider sense of the clubs direction. I think that's probably best for us now, though. A healthy Palace is one capable of winning any given game against anyone, of being a stable presence in the top flight, and once in a blue moon of going close in a cup. Maybe one year here and there we do get into Europe. Maybe we even do well there once. Fulham did it. The point is that none of that can be realistically planned for and delivered, it just sometimes happens. When it does, it will not change the landscape or our place in it. Focussing on Palace going to the 'next level' is often just howling at the moon.
Parish talks from time to time, in great detail and very directly, about how football regulations are increasingly keeping clubs like Palace at arms length, preventing them from ever threatening the status quo. I don't see any reason to think that Parish wants us to be 12th per se. Its more that it becomes harder every year to get to 9th, 8th, or whatever 'progress' might look like. The clubs above get more and more money every time. Each season, they are lined up another few yards ahead of us when the starting gun goes off.
Also, the model is based not on what we think we might 'need', but on what we can actually do. For example, whilst I agree it was clear that we only had Munoz for the RWB position, that doesn't make another RWB who is anywhere near as good, and who wants to join us, from a club that is prepared to sell, suddenly become available in our price range. I'm sure the club were aware that Europe strains the squad depth beyond breaking point, but knowledge of that fact wouldn't have changed the sums or the budget. It also wouldn't have allowed us to take more risks with debt. FFP and PSR are even tighter in Europe, as others have pointed out.
For me, FFP and PSR are brilliant ideas, at least in principle. I hate the thought that a clubs status is linked not to how its people and supporters build it up together over time, but rather on which (often highly dubious) wealthy foreigner wakes up one day and decides to buy it. That Abramovich-type model runs contrary to decent values on all sorts of levels. Moreover, if that rich owner dies, or gets divorced, or bored, or his homeland government decide to put the squeeze on him, that 120 year old English football club suddenly goes to the wall. We have seen that so many times over the years, at every level. It is right and proper that clubs rely on themselves and not on a benefactor.
The problem is that when you add FFP/PSR to a system where the highest placed teams get far more income, partly as a result of being highest placed, than the middle-placed teams, it becomes impossible for the big boys to get overtaken in any lasting way. The rich get richer, and even if your owner happens to have the money and the will, you can't challenge them. Perhaps one day English football will adopt an American sports approach, where the lowest placed get some kind of advantage over the higher ones to keep the competition interesting (although that system has its problems). For now though, our business model is based on reality, rather than preference or timidity.
Finally, the business model (as I have described it, as if I know what I am talking about!) is based on reality as it exists today. It is an approach to trading. The vision for the club is a different thing. It seems a bit ironic to me that Parish is sometimes charged with a lack of ambition. When I hear him talk about turning Palace from a part of a top players journey into their destination instead, I think he is being hopelessly optimistic.
Redeveloping Selhurst, costs and debt aside, is supposed to give us a bit more income so we can do a bit more within FFP. The academy is supposed to generate a player here and there, and perhaps some profit, again so we can survive in FFP. These are the only cards that Palace can play, and even if both are a huge success we would only be keeping up with the mid-table Joneses, not gaining some big advantage.
The moral of it for me is to recognise the reality and see the clubs approach in that light, if only to stop from going insane individually, or to stop the wider fan base turning toxic. Look at Spurs or West Ham. Is that enjoyable? Is that what football is now? Instead of supporters, just tens of thousands of entitled, dissatisfied customers who think anyone in charge is a prick and take as much satisfaction from protesting as from the game itself. No thanks.
It is not natural to just take each game on its own terms, without any wider sense of the clubs direction. I think that's probably best for us now, though. A healthy Palace is one capable of winning any given game against anyone, of being a stable presence in the top flight, and once in a blue moon of going close in a cup. Maybe one year here and there we do get into Europe. Maybe we even do well there once. Fulham did it. The point is that none of that can be realistically planned for and delivered, it just sometimes happens. When it does, it will not change the landscape or our place in it. Focussing on Palace going to the 'next level' is often just howling at the moon.
I agree witb you about PSR, so many fans slag it off because it prevents you competing with the top clubs but it was introduced for one thing and that was to prevent clubs being left in financial ruins, if/when the rich owner left for whatever reason.
The only way the league will ever be fair is if we have a wage cap, this will never happen, it makes no sense when the English game is so much more financially dominant over the rest of the world. Why prevent growth in our own league and allow other European leagues to become stronger, overtaking the english game.
What I like about the American game, is college football and the draft system and something we could adopt in this country. I think academies should be regional and associated with a university, completely funded by Premier league clubs. It allows young players to continue in education while playing football, it can be like
America, where the player can pick if they want to go in the 1st year draft or carry on with their education. Prem teams get first pick 17th to 1st, with the promoted teams getting the last 3 picks. The rest of the leagues basically get to pick who they want after. It takes a financial burden off the teams in the lower leagues. The top clubs will still be able to buy the best players from abroad but atleast the bottom half clubs get the best players from this country.
And as far as injuries go, every team (maybe bar Arsenal) struggle with it.
Take the Manchester derby, City had 2 keepers and 4 teenagers on the bench. As well as having to start Alleyne and Khusanov.
I like this idea in theory but college sports puts the US in a unique position. College sports are massively popular in their own right. In many cases college teams attract more supporters (100k a more) than an NFL team. The TV rights for college football (of the US variety) are worth a lot more than many of Europe’s top football leagues.
Players playing for top colleague teams have been battle hardened playing competitive sport at a high level in a way that just isn’t possible in an academy system. A fair analogy given the sheer size of the US would be going from the college system to the NFL is more like going from the Bundesliga to the Premier League.
You are right though without a salary cap we will never have anything approaching a level playing field and that ain’t happening. I think the European Super League is more likely
taylors lovechild
Member
- Country
-
England
What I find odd is that our success in recent years has come from signing the best talent from the Championship, but then rather than continue that model we chose to plunder young talent from Spain and France, which so far has not proven as fruitful (although the likes of Pinot and Canvot have shown glimpses of what they could offer) and have thrown big sums at Spurs and Arsenal for two players they deemed not good enough. Is there no talent left in the Championship? Why didn't we push harder for the likes of Hayden Hackney? I have no idea, but it feels like we changed direction when we were heading the right way.
As you say maybe we’ve scouted the available talent in the Championship and decided it isn’t at the level we need in the areas we need it. We did sign Esse which was a continuation of the model.
It wasn’t like the club exclusively signed championship players. Andersen had previously played for Lyon and Fulham on loan. Henderson came from Man Utd with loan spells in the Premier League for Shef Utd and Forest. Both were relatively big money for us at the time. Lerma was signed on a free having played for Southampton in the Premier League.
I think we look to Olise, Eze and Wharton because they’ve been so successful as transfers but they were always alongside signing more experienced players.
Palacesince64
Member
- Location
- Edinburgh
- Country
-
Scotland
I think we changed direction partly because Dougie left but also because we had a young ambitious manager playing a more exciting and successful brand of football and the board and chairman tried to support him. Esse was our last dip into the Championship and rightly or wrongly the manager didn’t rate him. He wanted older more experienced players who could fit into his system.
I do think we have to cast our net more widely and Canvot, although a little pricey, will prove to be a good buy alongside either Richards or Lacroix. Good to see Esse having a good game at the weekend and being applauded off when he was subbed.
This is what i see happening unfortunately, the english game will reach its ceiling, as soon as the big clubs lose its financial edge over its European rivals they will be straight on the phone talking about the European super league. Why worry about Villa and Newcastle taking your spot when you can have your closed off franchise league.
Agree with this. I suspect Premier League broadcast rights may have reached their financial peak (at least domestically). Sky is a shrinking business in terms of customers and will need to trim costs sooner or later. Premier League rights are probably its single biggest cost line so I expect the next round of rights auction to attract a lower bid from them and don’t see anyone else really wants to bid big.
At that point, given rights auctions have been a total disaster recently for Serie A, League 1 and the Bundesliga I can see the owners of the monied Premier League clubs along with PSG, Bayern and the Milan clubs all going for the super league model.
Willo
Member
- Location
- West Sussex - On the coast
- Country
-
England
Of course Glasner will have known the business model and the ethos of our club.
Perhaps he is not enamoured by some of the acquisitions during his time at the helm.
It is clear that he believes, further investment in players should have been made in the summer, hence his comments that after an FA Cup win, a club needed to invest and not save.
I reiterate, that none of the outfield summer acquisitions have made a significant contribution.