The Championship Thread 2023/2024

[AKCJ]

2 hours ago, Koke said:

 

Thi ****ing nonsense again??? I can't wait to get out this league. How many times does it have to be explained to them that Leicester and Southampton sold players for nearly £100m. And Leeds have a netspend of £1.5m or something low like that.

That's their point in fairness. That parachute payments should be scrapped and shared across the league because the relegated sides just sell their players to make money.

 

But the problem is when a side like Sheffield United go down in the summer with next to no players worth anything.

[mozartfox]

17 hours ago, goose2010 said:

4k for finishing bottom is an insult! 

Agree. Madders spends that on a designer Ruck-sack.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

3 hours ago, Koke said:

 

Thi ****ing nonsense again??? I can't wait to get out this league. How many times does it have to be explained to them that Leicester and Southampton sold players for nearly £100m. And Leeds have a netspend of £1.5m or something low like that.

It's so boring isn't it. I've said it all season, they're gutted us three are the top three becasue it shits all over their rhetoric of the Championship being a "tough league to get out of". The top 4 at the end of the season will all likely be teams that didn't play in this league last season, half of which with managers that have never managed in this league before. 

 

A few Championship tropes that pods like this love to peddle that need retiring:

 

"You need a manager with Championship experience" - Last year's winner and this year's current leader are basically rookie managers.

"There's no easy games in the Championship" - Look at our games against Stoke, Cardiff etc. Definition of processions. 

"The Championship is the most competitive league in the world" - there's a good chance this season has one of the biggest ever gaps between 1st and 24th, wow so comeptitve! 

Edited 9 February by Sol thewall Bamba

[filbertway]

25 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

It's so boring isn't it. I've said it all season, they're gutted us three are the top three becasue it shits all over their rhetoric of the Championship being a "tough league to get out of". The top 4 at the end of the season will all likely be teams that didn't play in this league last season, half of which with managers that have never managed in this league before. 

 

A few Championship tropes that pods like this love to peddle that need retiring:

 

"You need a manager with Championship experience" - Last year's winner and this year's current leader are basically rookie managers.

"There's no easy games in the Championship" - Look at our games against Stoke, Cardiff etc. Definition of processions. 

"The Championship is the most competitive league in the world" - there's a good chance this season has one of the biggest ever gaps between 1st and 24th, wow so comeptitve! 

It annoys me when anyone attributes any of these to any league to be honest.

 

You get upsets in every single league.

There are easy games in every single league.

Having a squad worth at least 5 times the rest of the league trumps having experience.

It is weird that we get rewarded for failing though. It's basically like saying "Here you go lads, we're making it as easy as possible from you to bounce back from relegation."

 

The fact we've been able to retain this squad is absolutely ludicrous

 

[LCFCJohn]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

That's their point in fairness. That parachute payments should be scrapped and shared across the league because the relegated sides just sell their players to make money.

 

But the problem is when a side like Sheffield United go down in the summer with next to no players worth anything.

Hamer, Archer, Ahmedhodzic?

 

They may not fetch as much as Maddison and Barnes did but equally, they won’t need to raise as much as their outgoings/expenditure will be significantly less than us. Alternatively they have some very good players for the Championship. I thought they had done decent business in the summer but maybe held on to Heckingbottom too long and with the memories of their last season in the Prem being a disaster, have just had their heads down since the season started.

[fuchsntf]

17 hours ago, filbertway said:

Wow that disparity is insanely unfair 

 

4k...what's the point.

 

Divide that between all 24 and throw in a little extra to top it up and each team could get 750k for being part of the league.

 

 

 

Just to throwin a curved ball….

Arent these payouts,well balanced…

Its all sad or pretty nice,,according to your season.

Its competitive and professional sport..you take your chances.

The higher your achievements,surely higher the spoils….

 

Do I feel sorry for Sheffield.utd or Rotherham..YES..!!

But they took their chance,to see if they could compete

they found their answer…

 

FFP rulings will help in the long run, but at first most « also rans »

in every league may have over spent…But all clubs will in a short time

recognise their budget. Plus in 2-4 seasons time Agents and their Players

will be forced to drop their expectations the hard way…They have no buyers,

Europe or world wide…

 

We have to try & pull back on the extremes…and not feed it further.

Contracts will have to be more balanced, the length can stay the same

1,3,5 yr contract. The fees will find a better balance where clubs can’t loan

money, they will be forced to buy at said price money on table, therefore the selling clubs can’t be over zealous..It will take a while 2-4 seasons, until the player-pool market comes down a bit more,and hopefully see in 5 seasons fewer players earning vast sums, without gametime,around the middle teams.

Funny thing is Man.city,L.Pool,Arsenal,and Leicester do rotate,and pick n choose their players. Every club has the right to have 25 player squads + Academy,successfull teams can afford in depth quality…but the prices on release

are better balanced if buyer can’t loan money for a transfer..unless it’s payed off according to FFP rulings.And Wages agreed to within FFP regulations

like I said it will take time…but also the fans must and should accept then welcome their clubs live within their means.

 

Now how each football competitions take their profits and see their grass roots

football and clubs are honoured and helped ,we come back to the original  response

to this post..We need the PL profits to help also the championship/league teams,which it does…plus these teams outside the PL have their own Associations,that are answerable to their teams….In simple terms for the fans,

if PL could find let’s say an extra £10mil,where £3mil goes to prize money and the championship finds from their profits an extra £7 mil where £3mil goes to placing..

Ditto for the other 2 league's according to their profits…..In fact that is how it functions,it’s just the question on profits and fair distribution,certain leaway to be discussed and found to help lower team at “this moment” struggling to survive and pay eventually their way….
 

. BUT..!! We shouldn’t forget,it’s a professional sport,with interested party investing in “their” team,… Owners & Sponsors. Once certain regulations are set and they all apply and agree to certain regulations,they the clubs are allowed to work in a free market..Its basically what we already have.

Its just there is at present a seen unbalance in passed down grass roots money &

What owners ,sponsors, ( would be saviours) financial capabilities it brings in

# player investments

# Club improvements

# club infrastructure staff….

 

If we want the sport to go on,with a better balanced profit

margins shared from & through the various level, regulations,controlled implementation,more importantly a controlled measure the clubs don’t spend above their means.

FFP is a start to the means,EUFA is trying to find a way,and maybe we can see the end of Astronomical transfer fees,and OTT wages. Automatic % drop in wages if relegated,no player negotiation..No automatic expectancy of wage increase if

promoted,club will need to see if income warrants it.

If a Leeds happen to be richer,than fellow promotion candidates,that’s to their good,such teams shall not suffer

,they shouldn’t then suffer decreased promotion prizes.

Each get what they earn.”.First”  

Edited 9 February by fuchsntf

[ARM1968]

4 minutes ago, filbertway said:

It annoys me when anyone attributes any of these to any league to be honest.

 

You get upsets in every single league.

There are easy games in every single league.

Having a squad worth at least 5 times the rest of the league trumps having experience.

It is weird that we get rewarded for failing though. It's basically like saying "Here you go lads, we're making it as easy as possible from you to bounce back from relegation."

 

The fact we've been able to retain this squad is absolutely ludicrous

 

Just shows the utter brokeness of football due to the money in the Premier League. Some teams break the mould, like Luton, but not often. I’ve enjoyed the Championship, because we’re doing well, next season will be a slog as we slosh about in the money pit. The gap keeps widening and the illusion of reaching the premier league will become ever more remote and deluded. 

[Spudulike]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

That's their point in fairness. That parachute payments should be scrapped and shared across the league because the relegated sides just sell their players to make money.

 

But the problem is when a side like Sheffield United go down in the summer with next to no players worth anything.

Notts F will be OK though. The Snotties reckon their players are worth billions. 

[coolhandfox]

The premier league broke the pyramid. 

[DZ-LCFC]

 

[filbertway]

3 minutes ago, DZ-LCFC said:

 

[Motty]

21 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

 

I did say ^^^

 

Also Southampton's "dreadful start" is overstated. They lost 4 in a row, sure. But haven't lost since. And we've lost 4 times too. The only difference between us and Southampton is 3 draws vs 7 draws

 

 

And yes, season long run rates are a blunt instrument. Just the same as run rates for shorter periods of form, which are 'worse' for being less reflective of any sort of pattern. Neither are predictive

 

 

 

 

Surely the main difference is 23 wins v 18wins

[Les-TA-Jon]

7 minutes ago, Motty said:

Surely the main difference is 23 wins v 18wins

That's just 3 draws vs 7 draws expressed in a different way isn't it? 

[Motty]

21 hours ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

 

I did say ^^^

 

Also Southampton's "dreadful start" is overstated. They lost 4 in a row, sure. But haven't lost since. And we've lost 4 times too. The only difference between us and Southampton is 3 draws vs 7 draws

 

 

And yes, season long run rates are a blunt instrument. Just the same as run rates for shorter periods of form, which are 'worse' for being less reflective of any sort of pattern. Neither are predictive

 

 

 

 

OK we ignore Southamptons poor start

Since they started their "true form"

Thay have gained 3 points on us

Also note who their poor start losses were against 

Sunderland

Leicester

Ipswich

Borough

All who were playing well at that time

The only top team they beat in this run is Leeds.

I think we will beat them when we play.

 

[fuchsntf]

1 hour ago, ARM1968 said:

Just shows the utter brokeness of football due to the money in the Premier League. Some teams break the mould, like Luton, but not often. I’ve enjoyed the Championship, because we’re doing well, next season will be a slog as we slosh about in the money pit. The gap keeps widening and the illusion of reaching the premier league will become ever more remote and deluded. 

We live in a capitalist society, I don’t believe within these chaotic boundaries,that we have,That the PL is something we should take for granted or spit at….

Whats on the field within its various modern characteristics is a super stage,

Today tv/Plastic tourists are part of the infrastructure,if it wasn’t Sky then the Asia market is technically a few steps in front,so they would have created their own platform…Plus Australia considered a few steps behind,they too would and have

a World wide TV sponsor platform….

What some fans dislike in UK,is the Skysports commentary and they themselves

are bias,not just the pundits…

Off-field prize distribution, TV profit given to Football is probably poorly distributed

that can not be combined with the onfield…

Transfer/Wages has nothing to do with onfield performances..

Manager & player relations have on-field repercussions,that’s part of life.where fans will have also their opinions

I dont like sky sports,because at first they promise many top sport coverage,then ask extra,or increase costs too rapidly…I cancelled everything to do with Sky.

In mainland Europe,I can see every top league,and often lower league football,

either by “pay tv”  pay as you go, or packets, without  sky,or often terrestrial.

That all said,I love watching PL football, the only hate is VAR & how much game incidents they cover,instead of introducing certain issues slowly. Plus not keeping to its the ref descision, not someone’s in a pod,that could well be bias.
First the technic for incidents have to be failure free,and for every game,

lines drawn for offside have to be available to ref-line side-monitor..

Every descision should be his alone,only VAR has a suggested help.

We forget TMR in Rugby need several seasons to reach where it is.

Ref has to be given support from authorities,Yellow cards are not given often enough for not retiring once Ref-descision is made. Crowding ref after 5 seconds,

yellow card.All players in the crowd..A red card has to have man-management thoughts and solid verbal warnings. Like Rugby players seen to do something,that 

ref hasn’t picked upon there is every game a match tribunal ,that can give out suspensions…or yellow cards rescinded or brought up to red.

Football could take that up.

There is nothing wrong with the PL matches experience,other our opinions might be more cynical and OTT .The game itself I still love..

Forums and our cross talk and exchange of views, to me a pastime play platform.

Like debating with your mates,nothing personal,no controls of addressing each other, so long as it it keeps a certain decourum and sarcasm sometimes with a turn of wit..The odd rant, why not..

Again whether PL,Championship,or through the game down to Stadium-Rovers,or Anstey Nomads, I love watching football.

[Motty]

7 minutes ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

That's just 3 draws vs 7 draws expressed in a different way isn't it? 

Surely the wins is a better measure as drawing gives 1 point and winning 3

Edited 9 February by Motty

[Les-TA-Jon]

1 minute ago, Motty said:

Surely the wins is a better measure as drawing gives 1 point and winning 3

I'm just saying, that 3 draws vs 7 draws is the same as 22 wins vs 18 wins 

 

It's 4 games where the results are different.

 

They're different, because we won them and they drew them. 8 more points dropped, hence the 8 point gap. 

[Motty]

1 minute ago, Les-TA-Jon said:

I'm just saying, that 3 draws vs 7 draws is the same as 22 wins vs 18 wins 

 

It's 4 games where the results are different.

 

They're different, because we won them and they drew them. 8 more points dropped, hence the 8 point gap. 

Your math won't work as we have 23 wins and at present the gap is 11.

However on draws there is an 8 point gap.

In reply to your earlier question it is another way to state it.

 

[Les-TA-Jon]

11 minutes ago, Motty said:

Your math won't work as we have 23 wins and at present the gap is 11.

However on draws there is an 8 point gap.

In reply to your earlier question it is another way to state it.

 

The maths does work. I'm deliberately accounting for Southampton's game in hand. If we're going to compare results, it's unfair to say 23 wins vs 18 win when we've played one more game. 

 

Either way, there's demonstrably not much between us and Southampton this season. 4 games difference. 

[Nalis]

The parachute payments argument is either stupid or clickbait from them. I thought you didnt get any if you go straight back up?

[CloudFox]

2 hours ago, filbertway said:

The fact we've been able to retain this squad is absolutely ludicrous

 

I agree. I am convinced it's the one silver lining of our being so generous with wages though: I thought we'd get ripped apart for our players in the summer, but for those below the Maddison/Barnes level, clubs probably aren't prepared to pay the high wages for players that have been relegated. It's not like us signing Maguire from Hull when they went down, where we can offer him more money as well as a better platform. 

[Dan LCFC]

Ipswich's fixtures until April, with the exception of tomorrow, are really nice. They're being overlooked in this even if they do look to have dropped off.

 

If we come out of that Saints game top I'm about 95% sure we'd win the league, and I'm pretty sure we will too.

[KingsX]

6 hours ago, coolhandfox said:

Us or Leeds are likely to be the first championship club to break the 100m tunover barrier

Taking away the parachute payment would cut that tunover by around 50%

Anyone who thinks it's not an advantage need to give there head a wobble.

We would have seen a bigger fire sale, KDH and Faes would have been sold.

 

The purpose of parachute payments is to make it possible for demoted clubs to move from the League where the 18th place club (us) pulled in ₤133M last year, to one where an upper-midtable club makes ₤20M or ₤25M.  This disparity is now so great, relegation is ruinous almost by definition.   How does a business deal with overnight loss of ¾ of its revenue?

 

Without the parachute, demoted clubs would have to unload every salable player, at fire-sale prices.  Fire even more staff than they already do.  Probably slash their women’s clubs and community programs.  Some would still face bankruptcy.

 

Promoted yo-yo clubs can trim their cloth, and keep spending near Champ levels.  If they and their fans accept just a modest chance of competing … for 17th.

 

But a club like ours, up for a decade, with some years in Europe and none near relegation (until the dwarf saboteur), will not be running a bare bones operation.  How can such clubs plan?  We were not sure we were down until the last kick at Goodison.

 

We sold our most valuable stars and trimmed (vice slashed) staff.  Without the parachute, cost control would have required a bloodbath.  No Enzo, few familiar senior pros, and a lot more sudden unemployment in Leics.

 

There is no easy answer, especially with the PL clubs still fighting over funding the rest of the pyramid.  But killing parachute payments, increases competition in the Champ only by destroying relegated clubs’ ability to compete.

 

Might sound good if you’re a Cov or Brizzle fan … but why are some of our fans on board?

Edited 9 February by KingsX

[cruzFOX]

That’s a great explanation kingsX! 👍🏾

[coolhandfox]

 

1 hour ago, KingsX said:

There is no easy answer, especially with the PL clubs still fighting over funding the rest of the pyramid.  But killing parachute payments, increases competition in the Champ only by destroying relegated clubs’ ability to compete.

I'm not saying there is; I'm just against the notion that it is not an advantage. 

 

The PL has distorted the football league pyramid, creating a massive gap between the haves and haven't. 

 

But you also forget that most PL clubs and football clubs, in general, are poorly run businesses. 

Edited 9 February by coolhandfox