Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  INTERNET MALE on Tue Feb 10, 2009 1:16 am

Rocky wrote:Here we go again Wink

INTERNET MALE wrote:their poor form had very little to do with Tony Adams tbh, i doubt even a truly world-class manager could do much with the mess Redknapp left.

They have better players than most in the bottom half. Kranjcar, Johnson, Crouch, James, Distin, Davis, Kaboul, Campbell, Diop, Traore (not Djimi), Kanu, Belhadj, Utaka etc. They've just brought in the 06/07 Bundesliga top scorer Gekas, Basinas and Pennant

James
Johnson(Pamarot) Campbell(Kaboul) Distin Traore.A(Hreidarsson)
Pennant(Utaka, Basinas) Davis(Diop) Kranjcar Belhadj
Crouch Nugent(Kanu, Gekas)

That team/squad is more than good enough, Wycombe Tony is a very poor manager.

INTERNET MALE wrote: Nearly 95% of the club's income goes straight towards paying it. They're in that same position Leeds Utd were a few years ago, where hoping that the few decent players they've got left can keep them up another season or two to avoid total meltdown.

Villa have higher wages than income (if Lerner left tomorrow they would be in big trouble, yet I can't see anyone blaming O'Neill for something which isn't his responsibility), newcastle and west ham is in the same area (and no redknapp is NOT responsible for Neill, Ashton, Dyer etc. being payed ridiculous high wages). Its incredible how Redknapp is blamed for not doing the job of the owner/board/CFO, just so you know he's got his hands full as he is picking up the cleaning lady and gardener's slack as well.

They had a couple of utterly abysmal runs in Redknapp's last year, capitulating 6-0 to Man City and playing like an average League One side in the 5 Premiership games preceding their cup final. Just like the mixed bag of Perrin's reign, he's been crucified in the media without actually doing much worse than Harry does in comparable situations.

Yes, they've a squad that, if everyone was fit or on form, has a solid starting XI with a couple of useful subs, but SURELY as a fan of a team that could field 2 seperate lineups that could each compete for a UEFA Cup slot 'on paper' you realise that 'on paper' means fuck all if a squad doesn't gel, if players aren't trying or if aging first teamers aren't replaced/backed up (again, Redknapp's approach to both the youth system in general and existing youth products was utterly shocking, the only homegrown regular they ever had under him was Gary O'Neil, who he forced out and who Adams immediately tried to re-sign on his leaving. because he was undoubtedly one of their best players when he left. Their policy of youth signings is pretty baffling in general too, this season they went for Khaleem Hyland, whose agent is one of 'arry's favoured, and bizarrely one of our rejects from Plymouth Argyle). If we're talking 'on paper' then it's Hull, Stoke, and probably Fulham going down, why even bother playing the actual fixtures. Outside of those 3, two of whom are playing waaaaay above their expectations, it's a total crapshoot outside the top of the table, entirely down to personal opinion who has 'better players' apart from Spurs and Man City. I think when you mix in the totally unsustainable wage bill, Harry's knack of jumping ship immediately after a success, the media's blind eye for the incredible short-termism even by his standards of this squad he'd assembled, and Gaydamak wanting to sell so he can go back to killing the fuck out of a load of africans - they were always going to be in the relegation mix. iirc I predicted it in the run up to the cup final, and i've always stuck to that no matter who the manager is. They could hire Hiddink tomorrow, they're still going to be in the championship come August.

Portsmouth's squad was a disaster waiting to happen. They sold their most important player from last season, Sulley Muntari, and rather than replace him sold his competent backup Pedro Mendes. Their whole season therefore hinged on the excellent Diarra staying fit and them finding someone harder working than Kranjcar to play alongside him (possibly still leaving room for Kranjcar to play in a free role) - they did neither, and Adams was only able to sign a free transfer to replace a £21.5m outgoing player. They've got nothing powering the midfield at all, and you cannot win games at that level without an engine. Key defensive players like David James and Sol Campbell have noticeably declined (not that James isn't still more than serviceable, but he won them so many points in preceding seasons), Distin has hit Micah Richards level of "is he sending out a lookalike?" ineptitude, much has he has at times at Newcastle and City when getting fed up of his club, Yakubu-style. Kranjcar is incredibly talented but incredibly inconsistent and not the player you need in a relegation-threatened team. Utaka similarly hasn't developed much, the fans there don't seem to rate him at all beyond his pace as an impact sub. He's also on an insane wage for a non-starter at a club financially tanking. Kanu has bad runs of form that last 50 games instead of 5, he seems to be in the middle of one right now. Their left side is Belhadj and Traore, who might as well be the same player - insanely fast, good going forward if lacking a plan B, total sieves defensively. Also, crucially, they own neither. They also don't own Jermaine Pennant, Pele, or Gekas - if they were to somehow stay in the Prem they could sign one or two of those players (Traore not likely) but they're likely going down and having loads of loanees will only compound their financial problems, lessening the potential for a lucrative June firesale. Their first team rotation includes Davis, Glen Little and Richard Hughes. On the bright side, Crouch and Glen Johnson are excellent and Kaboul no longer seems a disaster.

I might be wrong, but i'm sure i'd read (pre-Heskey) that Villa's wage bill was both in the bottom half of the premiership and below the average (which gets distorted by Chelsea, Man Utd, Man City, Liverpool and Spurs ). If they're losing money on that it's a concern, but it's nowhere near comparable a situation to Portsmouth for countless reasons:
- they own all their players, raising money quickly would be quite easy
- they've a load of good youngsters, many from their own academy, who will only increase in market value going forward (Agbonlahor, Delfouneso, Guzan, and Osbourne, plus expensive purchases Ashley Young and Curtis Davies could still be sold at a profit)
- they're on the verge of the Champions League, which'll earn them in the region of £30m. Portsmouth had to gut their midfield to raise that.
- no real 'fat' to the squad. they've even got Zat Knight playing really well ffs. Leeds famously had to pay 5-figure salaries to ex players for years because when they had to trim the wage bill, nobody wanted them (either they were shit, crocked or just massively overpaid) - can you really see any other club in the world offering John Utaka £60,000 a week? can you see one of Redknapp's gaggle of favoured agents (if he wasn't with one, he wouldn't be at Portsmouth FC) advising him to take a pay cut?

_________________


THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS
avatar
INTERNET MALE
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1076
Join date : 2008-05-04
Age : 33

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Wilkesandliberty on Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:03 am

The only facts I really know about Portsmouth is that Kuyt stripped both Distin and Campbell for Pace, James should have saved two of the shots. What the hell was Crouch doing so far back even when you are 1-0 up. I wouldn't say they were any worse than they were in November at Anfield in which they defended for 90 mins in one of Adams First games in charge.

I think the standard of the side was slipping before Adams took charge, regardless of who takes over now I doubt they will survive, If Stoke keep dragging out the odd result and Boro can gain some results then I think Pompey's season looks bleak.

_________________
Earl of Sandwhich . . .You shall either die of the pox or on the gallows
John Wilkes . . . That sir depends on whether I embrace your mistress or your politics”
avatar
Wilkesandliberty
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1026
Join date : 2008-05-18
Age : 293
Location : The House of Commons/Whore House

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Rocky on Tue Feb 10, 2009 8:27 am

I got Villa's numbers from deloitte's report, admitedly it is for the 2006/07 season but I doubt their wage/turnover ratio has changed much since then (both probably gone up quite a bit). Yeah sure Villa has better assetts in their squad, but compared to portsmouth 8 months ago its not that much of a difference. Diarra, Defoe, Kranjcar, Johnson, Crouch, Muntari could raise about the same as Barry, Young, Agbonlahor, Davies etc. Villa without lerner is actually pretty similar to pompey a year or so ago. Quite a few old players on good money (Laursen, Friedel, Carew, Heskey, Petrov, Young.L), a wage bill not supported by their revenue and a manager who is considered God in the press. Sure they can raise money by qualifying for the CL (might have a lasagna incident or do an everton though) or selling their best players, however that does not sound like a long term plan for financial security to me. They depend on Lerner, luckilly for them he seem like a nice enough guy who is in it for the long haul.

Aston Villa: Finished the 2006/07 season with the fifth highest assets in the country (£35 million) and increased their home match attendances to 94.8 per cent of their 40,375 capacity stadium. They were also one of the top six investors in facilities in that season, injecting £9.9 million. However, their wage expenditure exceeded the income generated from revenue, leaving them £1.2 million in deficit. The club also recorded £63 million of debt in the summer of 2007.


Portsmouth: Portsmouth utilised 97.9 per cent of their 19,905 capacity stadium in the last season, although they are critically close to Deloitte's "danger level" by spending large amounts on their wage bill, without being able to support it with revenues.

As for pompey being unsavable...didn't look that way when Harry was in charge. Adams have to take responsibility for failing to motivate his players (Distin, James, Campbell etc.) or put out a balanced team (loads of opportunities in that squad and he didn't exactly adress anything with his loan signings). I didn't say anything about football being played on paper, that is kind of my point, if your manager is clueless it doesn't matter how much quality you have in the squad.
avatar
Rocky

Posts : 358
Join date : 2008-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Wilkesandliberty on Tue Feb 10, 2009 9:55 am

6-0 to Man City
4-0 to Chelsea
3-0 to Braga

Scraping results against teams like Stoke.

They were hardly sitting pretty.

Mind you they beat Spurs.

_________________
Earl of Sandwhich . . .You shall either die of the pox or on the gallows
John Wilkes . . . That sir depends on whether I embrace your mistress or your politics”
avatar
Wilkesandliberty
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1026
Join date : 2008-05-18
Age : 293
Location : The House of Commons/Whore House

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Rocky on Tue Feb 10, 2009 2:17 pm

Wilkesandliberty wrote:6-0 to Man City
4-0 to Chelsea
3-0 to Braga

Scraping results against teams like Stoke.

They were hardly sitting pretty.

Mind you they beat Spurs.

Scraping a win against stoke like pompey, everton, man utd and chelsea did is better than losing (spurs, arsenal, villa, city) or drawing (liverpool(twice!)) though matt. And pompey beat Everton 3-0 away from home, took a point away from home against villa and took 7 points from Redknapps last 3 games in charge.

Portsmouth PL 08/09 under Harry: 4-1-3, 13 points in 8, at that pace they would have 39 points after 24 games and half of the games was against teams that are currently in the top 6.

Portsmouth PL 08/09 under Tony: 2-5-9, 11 points in 16, at that pace they would have 16-17 points after 24 games and only 25% of the games was against teams that are currently in the top 6.

Surely it is more relevant and accurate to look at Redknapps relatively poor results at spurs (when considering the squad available to him and ignoring his predecessors even worse showing) if you want to critisize his managerial skills.
avatar
Rocky

Posts : 358
Join date : 2008-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Wilkesandliberty on Tue Feb 10, 2009 3:07 pm

Yeah compare like to like with Stoke.

They have shockingly fallen apart against teams of a similar elk while picking up impressive results like some other teams of previous years (Wimbledon, Derby and so on).

They got a good result against Everton, when Everton were scraping around the lower parts of the league, before they discovered a run and rose up.

The stats are better for Redknapp than Adams but they are hardly amazing for a man who has held the tenure of the club for 6 years. Adams had very little time and squad that was losing players that were vital. As I've said Pompey looked better than they did against us in November but that's natural as it was at home.

_________________
Earl of Sandwhich . . .You shall either die of the pox or on the gallows
John Wilkes . . . That sir depends on whether I embrace your mistress or your politics”
avatar
Wilkesandliberty
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1026
Join date : 2008-05-18
Age : 293
Location : The House of Commons/Whore House

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Rocky on Tue Feb 10, 2009 4:21 pm

Wilkesandliberty wrote:
The stats are better for Redknapp than Adams but they are hardly amazing for a man who has held the tenure of the club for 6 years.


39 points after 24 would be 7th place, a point behind everton with a game in hand, and another year in the PL.

Ok, statistics can be twisted to "prove" a lot of things and only Allah knows if Redknapp had managed to keep up the form of the first 8 games and keep pompey in the top half, but they didn't look like relegation candidates under him.
avatar
Rocky

Posts : 358
Join date : 2008-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  INTERNET MALE on Tue Feb 10, 2009 6:21 pm

Rocky wrote:
Wilkesandliberty wrote:6-0 to Man City
4-0 to Chelsea
3-0 to Braga

Scraping results against teams like Stoke.

They were hardly sitting pretty.

Mind you they beat Spurs.

Scraping a win against stoke like pompey, everton, man utd and chelsea did is better than losing (spurs, arsenal, villa, city) or drawing (liverpool(twice!)) though matt. And pompey beat Everton 3-0 away from home, took a point away from home against villa and took 7 points from Redknapps last 3 games in charge.

Portsmouth PL 08/09 under Harry: 4-1-3, 13 points in 8, at that pace they would have 39 points after 24 games and half of the games was against teams that are currently in the top 6.

Portsmouth PL 08/09 under Tony: 2-5-9, 11 points in 16, at that pace they would have 16-17 points after 24 games and only 25% of the games was against teams that are currently in the top 6.

Surely it is more relevant and accurate to look at Redknapps relatively poor results at spurs (when considering the squad available to him and ignoring his predecessors even worse showing) if you want to critisize his managerial skills.

Harry still had Diarra and Defoe, that's a fairly big advantage especially given that the sale of Diarra has left an absolutely gaping hole in the side. I'm not sure you can attribute too much to Harry's 'famous motivational skills' or whatever either, James being shit seems to be age finally catching up with him, Campbell is getting done for pace every week without Distin protecting him, and Distin turning shit seems to be something that runs on a cycle. Meanwhile, Dave Nugent, a typical Redknapp signing in that he was bought for a big fee and to all intents and purposes abandoned after less than 10 starts, only playing afterwards in case of injuries and suspension, looked really sharp at premiership level as soon as a manager actually put faith in him (sometimes out of position too).

Villa also were really really REALLY famously frugal under Doug Ellis to the point where fans got fed up with a perceived lack of ambition. They're spending big under Lerner because Lerner is there, rather than him being fortunately there to prop up their recklessness. Portsmouth by comparison have been run by two utter crooks, Mandaric and Gaydamak, who seem to treat the club as a money laundering scheme and wanted a manager who is both willing to whistle and turn the other way and is a good enough short term manager to keep the fans oblivious and happy with on-field success.

You look at Spurs, their massive squad, unfulfilled potential in so many young players they own or have owned, and they're really a club that need a robust plan going forward, that'll have them up with the Villas and th Arsenals in a couple of years. Trim the 'fat', focus on the youngsters deemed most likely to make it and the big names that are the most consistent, and add the best players possible in positions of need. Problem is, no matter how good a manager you think Harry Redknapp might be (and i'd never say he was a terrible one), there's nobody in the top flight's recent history with less of a methodically planned approach than Harry. All his clubs have had massive player turnover both ways, with the low success ratio you'd expect for a lower league club (who will usually sign players to rolling or 3/6 month contracts so they can ditch the ones that don't work out - not Harry) and the guy doesn't even follow football outside the English top flight. I don't know how good Spurs' scouting network is, how much of it was linked with Comolli and co, but Harry tends to put them second to players he's worked with before ('safe bet' at least, I guess) and more worryingly, a small group of 'trusted' agents, most prolifically the monstrously corrupt Willie McKay. When your primary source for transfer recommendations are the people that benefit most financially from a 'big contract' for the players involved, his poor hit rate in the transfer market makes perfect sense. Bear in mind that this is a guy who was totally out of his depth with Southampton as soon as they hit the mysterious depths of that great unknown league that is.... The Championship - just totally clueless, had no idea of the divisions' metagame, the sort of players that you need in it, anything.

Don't get me wrong, he'll keep you up, and may well give you a couple of seasons of modest success, all the while demonising his predecessor at every turn so you're grateful to have him. It's just very unlikely he'll build the side around a core of players that'll remain for years, that he'll sort out your youth system and figure out how to actually get the potential from the Bales and Taarabts, that he'll get you players that can be sold on for a profit should they want out later (Carrick, Berbatov?) or that you'll ever have enough quality, versatile backup to consistently compete with the top teams. I think you're a big enough club to break his run of financially ruining every club he's managed, but also his transfer policy will need to change for Spurs' higher ambitions

_________________


THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS
avatar
INTERNET MALE
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1076
Join date : 2008-05-04
Age : 33

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Rocky on Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:58 am

INTERNET MALE wrote:

Don't get me wrong, he'll keep you up, and may well give you a couple of seasons of modest success, all the while demonising his predecessor at every turn so you're grateful to have him.

Very few spurs fans on forums I visit or talk to is enthusiastic about him, neither am I. I was arguing against the idea that he would have sent pompey down, which is not supported by his record there and would have been quite an achevement considering the squad available to him. To sum up my position; redknapp: midtable average manager, adams: a proven disaster.
avatar
Rocky

Posts : 358
Join date : 2008-06-06

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  INTERNET MALE on Wed Feb 11, 2009 1:39 am

Rocky wrote:
INTERNET MALE wrote:

Don't get me wrong, he'll keep you up, and may well give you a couple of seasons of modest success, all the while demonising his predecessor at every turn so you're grateful to have him.

Very few spurs fans on forums I visit or talk to is enthusiastic about him, neither am I. I was arguing against the idea that he would have sent pompey down, which is not supported by his record there and would have been quite an achevement considering the squad available to him. To sum up my position; redknapp: midtable average manager, adams: a proven disaster.

this season I don't think anyone would have got more than an extra 3-6 points from the games Adams was in charge for - the squad is appalling and Redknapp assembled more than enough of it to shoulder some of the blame. I get that it's the board's fault above anyone else that they're in deep financial shit, but the situation during both Harry's reigns gave him a lot more influence than a manager would normally get, excepting Wenger-like situations, and the efficiency of his spending has, as ever, been incredibly poor (though not as bad as at West Ham or Southampton). I think he'd have taken them down, as would Adams, though the bottom half is close enough that you can't be certain. they can't stay up next year under anyone bar some miraculous Red Auerbach level wheeler-dealing, and there's a real risk of incurring a 9 point penalty should Gaydamak's house of dead africans cards collapse.

_________________


THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS
avatar
INTERNET MALE
Mod
Mod

Posts : 1076
Join date : 2008-05-04
Age : 33

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Portsmouth FC now only 84% more loathsome than any other league club

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 3 of 3 Previous  1, 2, 3

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum