Premier League 2018-2019 Part II

[Havre]

I like Ferdinand. Difficult to say if he has what it takes to be a DoF, but he seems to have the intelligence and I wouldn't be surprised if he had the social/professional network.

Generally speaking I don't think it is a good idea to load teams up with x-players, but this wouldn't be the worst in my opinion. Or at least I can see why someone would give him a shot. Arguably he should try it out at a smaller club first, but....

 

[Havre]

how is he even on the shortlist?

Just the fact that he's mentioned alongside Paul Mitchell as a candidate makes it embarrassing.

Spurs have had several of these "wonderboys/magicians" on their staff. Arnesen was supposed to be amazing. Mitchell. Baldini.

It's been OK, but nothing that special - any of them.

Also a bit funny that the one that was universally hated among Spurs-fans - Comolli. He is credited for Bale, Berbatov and Modric. There were other issues around Comolli and how the squad ended up being very unbalanced (which Redknapp fixed more or less), but none of the others have been even remotely close to finding three players as good as that.

 

[Il Mediano]

Spurs have had several of these "wonderboys/magicians" on their staff. Arnesen was supposed to be amazing. Mitchell. Baldini.

It's been OK, but nothing that special - any of them.

Also a bit funny that the one that was universally hated among Spurs-fans - Comolli. He is credited for Bale, Berbatov and Modric. There were other issues around Comolli and how the squad ended up being very unbalanced (which Redknapp fixed more or less), but none of the others have been even remotely close to finding three players as good as that.

I guess it's all a matter of opinion. Mitchell is a stud in my eyes and did good work with Spurs.

In terms of Rio, I'm not really questioning his football intelligence (though, his punditry makes me wonder occasionally), but more so factoring in the magnitude of the job at United. Not only is it a big rebuild (imo) on the pitch, but you have to consider they've never had a DoF in their existence.

This isn't a job where a guy with no prior experience can simply waltz into, imo. Perhaps in the future, once the position is solidified and the infrastructure is tried and tested, the club can afford to be more romantic with their appointments. But as of now, I wouldn't recommend it. I'm not sure people are truly aware of how behind the times United are in their front office structure. It's just as much of a rebuild off the pitch as it is on it.

 

[Havre]

I guess it's all a matter of opinion. Mitchell is a stud in my eyes and did good work with Spurs.

In terms of Rio, I'm not really questioning his football intelligence (though, his punditry makes me wonder occasionally), but more so factoring in the magnitude of the job at United. Not only is it a big rebuild (imo) on the pitch, but you have to consider they've never had a DoF in their existence.

This isn't a job where a guy with no prior experience can simply waltz into, imo. Perhaps in the future, once the position is solidified and the infrastructure is tried and tested, the club can afford to be more romantic with their appointments. But as of now, I wouldn't recommend it. I'm not sure people are truly aware of how behind the times United are in their front office structure. It's just as much of a rebuild off the pitch as it is on it.

Not complaining about what he did at Spurs, but I don't think his tenure there suggests he is special. Obviously sample size is very limited. He did bring in Alli, Son and Alderweireld (or was part of the group that did). That is not bad. However, I do find it a bit funny he apparently left the job because Spurs (or Levy I assume) refused to spend big money on Batshuayi. Good call there from Mitchell.

I wanted Mitchell to stay primarily because he apparently works very well with Pochettino. In that sense I'm still sorry he left.

I don't disagree with you on the description of the job at United. I wonder if you could argue the same about Mitchell though. Clearly he has more experience than Ferdinand, but he is still fairly young and wouldn't have the same kind of authority a more senior guy would have.

I guess the saddest part, on behalf on Utd, is that we both do not trust that club to make the right decision. If Spurs have hired Ferdinand I would have had confidence in them having considered all aspects (even if Levy did hire Sherwood).

 

[Theokritos]

I mean, I'm not sure the motivation for Rio. (...)
He's going to basically become the enemy of the supporters in exchange for a check and stamping approval on Woodward's signings.

I bet that's not the way he looks at it. It's ego. How many former players who had a successful career are there with enough self-reflection and perspective to not consider themselves knowledgeable and experienced enough for the job? Not too many, I guess. In his own mind he might be perfectly capable and his ideas are exactly what the club has been missing.

 

[Chimaera]

I'm not saying that Ferdinand would make a good Director of Football, but Abidal has been doing a great job for us.

I think it's a much easier sell to say, hey, come play in Barcelona with Messi than come deal with the city of Manchester and playing with I guess Pogba next season? It's also much easier to add a few parts to the backbone that's there than do the full overhaul which is what United probably need to do. Sure, Barca is rebuilding a bit on the fly, but United doesn't have the same youth setup, nor the best player in the world to put anything around.

I have would have no problem if Ferdinand was a 'closer' who did the end result, getting them over the line call. But I don't know that he has any scouting acumen beyond what he knows from playing the game. That can be enough, but I think that's a big club with a lot of problems in house to solve.

Maybe Ferdinand and Mitchell works. But I think having a conversation where they discuss in a straight face that the two of them are equivalent is ridiculous.

 

[Chimaera]

I bet that's not the way he looks at it. It's ego. How many former players who had a successful career are there with enough self-reflection and perspective to not consider themselves knowledgeable and experienced enough for the job? Not too many, I guess. In his own mind he might be perfectly capable and his ideas are exactly what the club has been missing.

Oh it's certainly ego. It's also a bit of a love of club and wanting to set them right.

But I don't know that he can fix all that is rotten in the State of Manchester.

 

[Burner Account]

What a shame.

 

[YNWA14]

What a shame.

Just as he was getting into form too. It's been a rough season for him.

 

[Havre]

Always a shame with injuries, but most likely won't make much difference to the outcome of the season.

 

[Savant]

Just as he was getting into form too. It's been a rough season for him.

Horrible, unpunished tackle that injured him

 

[Chimaera]

It's a rough season, but two or three matches left, it wasn't going to be a massive difference in the club's season.

Klopp already said in an interview that they see some of his efforts this season as a bonus, and that it was taking a while to get him integrated, that a lot of the work is more for the future next season. I'm glad it's only a month, so he can rest, rehab and be fit by the time they start camps.

He's going to be a flat track bully against some of the lower sides. His work rate and ability to switch from defense to offense are going to destroy some of the less sure footed midfielders and defenders.

 

[les Habs]

I think it's a much easier sell to say, hey, come play in Barcelona with Messi than come deal with the city of Manchester and playing with I guess Pogba next season? It's also much easier to add a few parts to the backbone that's there than do the full overhaul which is what United probably need to do. Sure, Barca is rebuilding a bit on the fly, but United doesn't have the same youth setup, nor the best player in the world to put anything around.

I have would have no problem if Ferdinand was a 'closer' who did the end result, getting them over the line call. But I don't know that he has any scouting acumen beyond what he knows from playing the game. That can be enough, but I think that's a big club with a lot of problems in house to solve.

Maybe Ferdinand and Mitchell works. But I think having a conversation where they discuss in a straight face that the two of them are equivalent is ridiculous.

The problem with the first part of your reply though is that it doesn't explain the difference in the respective performances of Barça's Directors of Football since Messi has been in the first team.

It's hard to say. I'd have said that about Abidal too, but then I think the overall decision making is a result of the scouting team, the manager and the Director of Football.

Either way they could do worse. I mean it's not like he's Gary Neville. Or imagine Roy Keane. "Too soft" of "he's shite."

 

[Chimaera]

The problem with the first part of your reply though is that it doesn't explain the difference in the respective performances of Barça's Directors of Football since Messi has been in the first team.

It's hard to say. I'd have said that about Abidal too, but then I think the overall decision making is a result of the scouting team, the manager and the Director of Football.

Either way they could do worse. I mean it's not like he's Gary Neville. Or imagine Roy Keane. "Too soft" of "he's ****e."

I think the issue is less about who he is and what he does, but just what would a Rio run team want to look like? I think you have some idea with how Abidal might want things to play out, knowing where he spent a lot of his formative years. I think like you said, he's much more supported with Barca than Ferdinand would be. He also spent time seeing how it was done in different countries, where Ferdinand really only knows England.

Sure, they could do way worse, but could they do better? That's my question. As much as I don't like to admit it, the league is better when United is good.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

 

[Havre]

Will be interesting. For me it depends a lot on what happens with Alderweireld and Eriksen. If they both leave then summer could be quite crazy. If they both stay (I find that unlikely, but maybe more likely now after the CL run) then I don't think Spurs need to do that much.

One player is missing in midfield. Someone like Tielemans. Personally I would get rid of either Dier or Wanyama as well, but... maybe that is what he talks about as "painful"? Right back is a bit of a mess, but if Foyth can keep it up he should be first choice. Lamela is done so got to bring in someone to give more competition to Son, Eriksen and Alli. Lucas is fine as a squad player, but nothing more. Son is the best forward backup we will get so no point in talking about an expensive signing to cover for Kane. As mentioned many times before I just pray that player isn't Zaha. And if it is Ryan Sessegnon I really hope we bring in two.

 

[YNWA14]

Really interesting article about the perceived 'big 6 and the rest'. Makes me think that Liverpool and City's respective seasons are even more impressive.

The Premier League Middle Class is Coming | StatsBomb

 

[les Habs]

I think the issue is less about who he is and what he does, but just what would a Rio run team want to look like? I think you have some idea with how Abidal might want things to play out, knowing where he spent a lot of his formative years. I think like you said, he's much more supported with Barca than Ferdinand would be. He also spent time seeing how it was done in different countries, where Ferdinand really only knows England.

Sure, they could do way worse, but could they do better? That's my question. As much as I don't like to admit it, the league is better when United is good.

I don't know how they would do it at United, but I wouldn't call it just a "Rio run team". He's a big part of the equation, but so is the manager. Anyway, I agree that Ferdinand doesn't have the same experiences that Abidal did. However he does know the club inside and out and that goes a long way. That said it's of course not the only thing to consider.

Well for me the discussion was about is Ferdinand and a worthy candidate and my only comment is that he might be and we simply don't know. Could they do better? I honestly don't know. Perhaps yes, but I've not seen a list of candidates put forward by anyone.

Really interesting article about the perceived 'big 6 and the rest'. Makes me think that Liverpool and City's respective seasons are even more impressive.

The Premier League Middle Class is Coming | StatsBomb

I'm not seeing anything to really indicate their seasons are more impressive. Their respective seasons are already impressive to begin with. I wouldn't use those stats to suggest the relative strength of the teams is better. In fact just comparing league tables you can see that chasing four if you will of the top six are going to finish close to what they did last season in terms of points per place. On top of that the relegation sides this season are notably worse than they were last season. From everything I'm seeing the league hasn't changed that much at all apart from say Liverpool's fantastic improvement and Wolves' presence.

 

[Stray Wasp]

If we look at the teams finishing 6th to 10th since 2016 (when the latest TV deal kicked in, which I think is always a useful mini-partition of time), we see the following:

2016-17: The Fallen Empire 69 points (Notable other achievements: Europa League & League Cup winners, ie they had distractions to stretch their squad depth)
Everton 61, Southampton 46 (League Cup finalists), Bournemouth 46, West Brom 45
2017-18: Arsenal 63 (Notable other achievements: Europa League semi-finalists, appeared in the League Cup final as punchbags)
Burnley 54, Everton 49, Leicester 47, Newcastle United 44

With two games remaining for everyone in this bracket bar Everton, the present standings are:

The Fallen Empire 65 (Notable other achievement: giving the rest of the league a hearty laugh at their expense, and showing every sign they intend to do the same next season. However, the fact that in spite of all their walking into garden rakes they may yet manage 70 points should provide pause for thought)
Wolves 54 (FA Cup semi-finalists), Everton 53, Leicester 51, Watford 50 (FA Cup finalists)

The middle-rankers seem to be a tad better, then. And two of them have provided more helpful counterpoints to Mike Ashley's contention that if you try to win a cup all your team will catch scabies or rickets and you will be relegated, so the best thing to do is pack your first eleven with young, cheap, stupid, spineless players and lose every second game you play.

What I find particularly interesting is the number of wins the middle bunch has. In 2016-17, only the top seven won more than 12 of their 38 games. Last year, Burnley won 14 games, and Everton 13. This season, to date Wolves, Everton and Leicester have all won 15 games, Watford 14, and West Ham 13.

If a team aims to break into the top six, the target must be to produce a 65-point campaign (not that 65 points is always sufficient, but it guarantees at the very least you'll come close). Realistically, that entails a minimum 18 wins from 38, whilst being resilient enough to avoid defeat in over half the other games. This season's results indicate the 'tweeners are the closest they've been to hitting that target since the latest hike in TV income. However, the higher you aim the less the margin for error.

Which brings us to a skimmed analysis of who is ending the season looking best placed to kick on.

Wolves' run at the time of writing is 38 points from their last 22 games. If sustained over 38 games, that's them challenging for sixth. But all the usual questions of talent retention, squad improvement, depth and player motivation apply, to say nothing of the fact that Nuno, having enhanced his managerial reputation and being aged just 45, will surely want another crack at the Champions League sooner rather than later.

Everton is ending the season impressively, but loanees Andre Gomes and Zouma have started 51 EPL games between them. The question of how much money they'll be able to spend to increase their quality rather than stand pat is moot. They badly need a striker, but that's not usually the cheapest position to upgrade.

Leicester continues to party atop Claude Puel's managerial grave. But are their players capable of playing a full season without turning on the coach and slinging their hooks long enough to allow them to challenge the big guns? Even if they are, three clean sheets in 2019 translates over a full season to demanding a lot of Vardy, who is now 32 (and whose 18-goal haul needs qualifying with the point that 10 have come in the last nine games. Streakiness doesn't win 18 games in a season). And if a bigger club lures Tielemans, Vardy's supporting cast will be weakened.

As for Watford, they haven't kept a clean sheet since 9 February - not surprising given their platoon of defensive thirtysomethings. Throw in that two other key players - Capoue and Deeeney - are closing in on their 31st birthdays, and it's hard to imagine them finding greater consistency - not least if they somehow beat City and need to juggle the League alongside Yurp.

All told, then, the middle bit of the league is a mite stronger than in recent seasons, but if they want to break into the top six, this summer presents all of them significant challenges.

 

[Il Mediano]

It's obvious Wolves and Watford have good programs, and Everton seems to be heading in the right direction after wasting so much money in recent memory. Marcel Brands was a clear upgrade as a DoF, and Silva's a good coach. I still don't have a great feel for their new ownership, but only time can provide the answers. As for Leicester, I have faith that Rodgers can build something relatively formidable there as well.

But for me, I still contend Chelsea, Arsenal and United are pretty poor and Spurs just don't have the ammunition at the moment. That has a larger effect on Liverpool and City's dominance rather than anything else. Like I said a few days ago, the Prem may be improving on the whole, but the big six isn't close to what it should be.

None of those 4 have beaten Liverpool, and City have only lost once (Chelsea). One loss between both clubs to Arsenal, Chelsea, United and Spurs... I mean, c'mon. That's 16 games.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the top 2; what they've done is brilliant, but the other giants of the Premier League aren't making it super difficult for them. Let's be honest.

And the counter-argument of "well, it's just because they're so much better" doesn't really fly. It's obviously a combination of brilliance alongside the benefit of weakened foes. Look at how shocking the top 4 race has been in the last few weeks. It's a bunch of clubs limping to the finish line and whoever's the least sh** will be rewarded.

 

[Machinehead]

City winning the FA Cup puts Liverpool in the Community Shield. They can't finish worse than Runners Up.

 

[Artorius Horus T]

If Newcastle beats Liverpool today at St. James Park and if City beats Leicester at Etihad, Monday.... City wins the league.
- Rather would want us to win the league at Etihad, <duh>

 

[YNWA14]

It's obvious Wolves and Watford have good programs, and Everton seems to be heading in the right direction after wasting so much money in recent memory. Marcel Brands was a clear upgrade as a DoF, and Silva's a good coach. I still don't have a great feel for their new ownership, but only time can provide the answers. As for Leicester, I have faith that Rodgers can build something relatively formidable there as well.

But for me, I still contend Chelsea, Arsenal and United are pretty poor and Spurs just don't have the ammunition at the moment. That has a larger effect on Liverpool and City's dominance rather than anything else. Like I said a few days ago, the Prem may be improving on the whole, but the big six isn't close to what it should be.

None of those 4 have beaten Liverpool, and City have only lost once (Chelsea). One loss between both clubs to Arsenal, Chelsea, United and Spurs... I mean, c'mon. That's 16 games.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the top 2; what they've done is brilliant, but the other giants of the Premier League aren't making it super difficult for them. Let's be honest.

And the counter-argument of "well, it's just because they're so much better" doesn't really fly. It's obviously a combination of brilliance alongside the benefit of weakened foes. Look at how shocking the top 4 race has been in the last few weeks. It's a bunch of clubs limping to the finish line and whoever's the least sh** will be rewarded.

See I don't really agree with this. Teams haven't been just rolling over for Liverpool/City...they're trying to make it hard on them but honestly, this year, they're just a class above. I also don't agree with the last paragraph; I've watched most of these games that the teams in the top 4 race are dropping and it's not just a matter of them playing "shit". These other teams are actually playing bravely and taking the game to them and I feel like this late in the season the big teams especially have played a lot, their best players are tired, and the quality of the teams they're facing are getting better and better.

The big 6 could be better if they were managed properly, but I think looking back and saying "oh the big clubs were better a decade ago" is still nostalgic (aside from United). These teams are quite good; City is the best PL team ever. However teams have been getting better everywhere.

 

[koyvoo]

Transfer ban for Chelsea partially upheld. They can still sign youth players for youth teams. They have one more route to appeal.

FIFA rejects Chelsea appeal against 1-year transfer ban

 

[bleedblue1223]

Transfer ban for Chelsea partially upheld. They can still sign youth players for youth teams. They have one more route to appeal.

FIFA rejects Chelsea appeal against 1-year transfer ban

To be expected, it's the CAS appeal that was always going to be the one that mattered, we just needed FIFA to give a ruling to allow us to appeal again to try and get it delayed for the summer.