[Albion] De Zerbi was NOT “sacked”

[Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo]

When Östersund sold David Accam in 2012, Graham Potter decided the money should be spent on data and training technology rather than buying new players. He went looking for the nerdiest nerd of data nerds to take charge of scouting and analysis. "I believe this really data oriented guy could do well at this really data oriented club" doesn't really imply a disbelief in what the club was/is doing. Which is why Kyle stayed for years while Salvatore was out after a window.

Roberto De Zerbi contradicted himself in nearly every press conference and interview. Covering all bases. "Very happy with the amazing club and how its run" one moment and then "we need 3-4 new players" quite literally in the next sentence.
And thats of course great for the RDZ cult that need to move a lot of goal posts and take a lot of U-turns to make him look good (and/or the club look bad).

They have plenty of pick from so there's always something. As seen in this thread currently with people suddenly claiming Roberto to be super happy with recruitment, and the clubs apparently shite data model being the cause of all the... pretty good results.

It’s not uncommon for a new manager to bring his own people in and have allies they can trust in different areas of the club. Somehow this is ok for your golden boy Potter but not for RDZ. And when RDZ realised he didn’t need his own guy in the recruitment team and he was let go he is also wrong.

Tell me who is moving the goalposts to make the cult of Potter look better than the cult of RDZ now?

 

[Guinness Boy]

Light hearted comic interjections, oblique references to the Pulp song "Something Changed", and apparently I've introduced you to the concept of succinctness, which I'll take as a win.

Some arguments are more pointless and repetitive than others. This particular debate is the footballing equivalent of Waiting for Godot. Nobody's going to change their mind and it wouldn't matter if they did.

I happen, in general, to agree with your perspective more than many others, by the way.

His perspective only makes sense if you draw the false and ridiculous straw man that anything slightly supportive of RDZ is a diss on Bloom.

The best post on this thread is @jcdenton08 ’s OP. It was a mutual decision that was beneficial to both parties.

Far better to look forward to an exciting new season under a potentially amazing young coach than let De Zerbi live rent free in your head.

 

[Han Solo]

Light hearted comic interjections, oblique references to the Pulp song "Something Changed", and apparently I've introduced you to the concept of succinctness, which I'll take as a win.

Some arguments are more pointless and repetitive than others. This particular debate is the footballing equivalent of Waiting for Godot. Nobody's going to change their mind and it wouldn't matter if they did.

I happen, in general, to agree with your perspective more than many others, by the way.

Sure and thats good stuff, if everyone was like me it would be utterly unbearable but same thing happens if everyone was only being witty rather than posting any sort of argument that could be discussed and argued around.

Repetitive yeah, but look at any football board and you'll find similar discussions about managers and recent managers, club philosphy and whatnot. Of course it won't change peoples positions - because people are emotional creatures - but the level is still decent and being conducted in the right fecking thread for once.

Not too different from any other debate btw. People get their opinions from sources they think have more authority than other forum members.

The prevalent idea that Danny Welbeck is always injured is a good example; it doesn't matter if he's out there on the pitch playing week out week in, it doesn't matter how many stats you show, it doesn't matter if you talk about the surgery he had to fix his core issues - he's still "always injured" because its some lingering trope the media spoke about 8 or 9 years ago that people use as a vehicle for their emotional desire to get a fancy new striker toy. if Daddy Swanny says Welbeck is a fine, fine bang average striker who play a lot of football, it changes nothing. If Daddy The Sun says "lololol Welbeck is always injured lololol" this will be imprinted forever in the minds of some impressionable people.

But yeah anyway, Roberto De Zerbi is shit.

 

[BadFish]

TLR?

 

[Flounce]

I am unusual on here in that I loved Potter AND RDZ, both did amazing things in a different order though. One took a while to get up to speed and turned into Judas just as we started to look a force, the other hit the ground running with Potter’s squad and without doubt gave us the best Albion football I’ve ever seen and then turned into a stroppy teenager and left when we couldn’t and wouldn’t match his ambitions and ego.

Bring on FH

 

[BadFish]

I am unusual on here in that I loved Potter AND RDZ, both did amazing things in a different order though. One took a while to get up to speed and turned into Judas just as we started to look a force, the other hit the ground running with Potter’s squad and without doubt gave us the best Albion football I’ve ever seen and then turned into a stroppy teenager and left.

Bring on FH

I am not sure you are allowed to hold these two positions!!

If it were allowed I would agree... and wish them both well in their future careers

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

I am not sure you are allowed to hold these two positions!!

If it were allowed I would agree... and wish them both well in their future careers

Well that's basically my position as well.

And look how succinctly it was expressed.

 

[Justice]

Lillian Brassier is reported to be DeZerbi’s first signing at OM, not exactly a £5Om superstar a player who was also wanted by Bmuff.
Lot of hearsay on this thread with the outliner a Potter fan is getting as many RDZ digs in as possible.

 

[Sid and the Sharknados]

His perspective only makes sense if you draw the false and ridiculous straw man that anything slightly supportive of RDZ is a diss on Bloom.

The best post on this thread is @jcdenton08 ’s OP. It was a mutual decision that was beneficial to both parties.

Far better to look forward to an exciting new season under a potentially amazing young coach than let De Zerbi live rent free in your head.

Well sure, but that's why I said I agree with his position more than others, rather than being all aboard the Swanny Fun Bus.

I'm not, as is probably obvious, terribly invested in the debate. He's gone, we've got a new manager and I'm looking forward to finding his Americanisms grating and irritating.

To be honest, until you pointed me back to it just then I hadn't bothered reading the OP either. Too lengthy. I got the gist from the thread title.

 

[Flounce]

Lillian Brassier is reported to be DeZerbi’s first signing at OM, not exactly a £5Om superstar a player who was also wanted by Bmuff.
Lot of hearsay on this thread with the outliner a Potter fan is getting as many RDZ digs in as possible.

Disappointed to see you holding back on getting in some anti Potter digs

 

[Guinness Boy]

Well sure, but that's why I said I agree with his position more than others, rather than being all aboard the Swanny Fun Bus.

I'm not, as is probably obvious, terribly invested in the debate. He's gone, we've got a new manager and I'm looking forward to finding his Americanisms grating and irritating.

To be honest, until you pointed me back to it just then I hadn't bothered reading the OP either. Too lengthy. I got the gist from the thread title.

Kids’ attention spans these days .

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I find this a bizarre -- flawed -- analysis. Yes, we've got players leaving their 'peak' but we've also got many entering it too. Just off the top of my head the following are entering into it: Lamptey, JPvH, Gilmour, Adingra and Joao Pedro. And that's without factoring in those that are already in it. The broad strategy (within which there are exceptions) is to buy young players and the odd experienced pro.

The point being that we have an imbalance, in the make up of the squad at the moment.

16 of the 33 players who took to the field for us last season are under 23 and played 35% of the total minutes
7 are over 32 and played 30% of the minutes.
The other 10 in the peak years played 35%

You accept that the strategy is to buy youth and experience.
To address the imbalance, we therefore have to stop selling our developing youngsters.
For Adingra and Pedro to still be playing for us in their peak years ( 22 & 21 year olds respectively), we will need to retain them for a while yet.

You may think my analysis is flawed, but I have taken some time to look into it.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the analysis, but I will accept my conclusions may be on the negative side.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I think we can all agree that we're a transit area rather than a final destination. All the decent players are just passing through. Guess it's the same for most clubs really. Player retention is the big challenge for clubs like us

 

[Machiavelli]

The point being that we have an imbalance, in the make up of the squad at the moment.

16 of the 33 players who took to the field for us last season are under 23 and played 35% of the total minutes
7 are over 32 and played 30% of the minutes.
The other 10 in the peak years played 35%

You accept that the strategy is to buy youth and experience.
To address the imbalance, we therefore have to stop selling our developing youngsters.
For Adingra and Pedro to still be playing for us in their peak years ( 22 & 21 year olds respectively), we will need to retain them for a while yet.

You may think my analysis is flawed, but I have taken some time to look into it.
In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with the analysis, but I will accept my conclusions may be on the negative side.

I'm not opining on your overall analysis. I merely responded to your point about Gross, March, Dunk, Veltman, etc moving out of their peak, and the neglect of factoring in that others were moving into it. If your point is that we need to be breaking the stated* strategy of buying promising youngsters and experienced model pros and also buying those in their peak (which is one point you've made on this thread), then I don't accept it as a broad strategy. Nor do I accept that we have to keep hold of players that are in their peak years (which you've said in the post I'm responding to), for the very reason that we'll most likely get large sums for them -- and that'll be the reason that they are sold, ie if there's an offer that we can't turn down.
Players in their peak are very expensive and, as a club, we're having to 'fish in different pools' (a repeated Barberism) than our PL rivals. Not to put too fine a point on it, we've been remarkably successful in our strategy, and that's why I'm defending it. I also particularly like the promising youngsters we've had of late -- seeing them develop is what football fans pine for. I've also enjoyed Lallana's technique, Welbeck's all-round game and late flourishing, Milner's bloody-mindedness and sheer professionalism, etc.
Thanks for the stats on playing minutes, which I wasn't aware of and are interesting. I'll just say two things on them. First, I think that's a pretty decent mix, but would add that there's probably too many in the 32+ category and would agree that the peak (which sounds like 23-31 in these stats) could do with a somewhat higher % but would add that we really suffered from injuries in that: March for most of the season, Mitoma for half of it, Pervis for more than half of it, JPvH towards the end, Igor in and out a bit -- and Dahoud who started the season shipped out half-way through it.
If we were a 'big six/seven' club -- by which I mean have a big six/seven budget -- then I'd agree with you on players in their peak but, as we're not, I don't.

*Note that the club don't tend to be too forthcoming with stating what their strategy is, so when they do, it's worth retaining it and reflecting on it.

 

[Swegulls]

No the point of the success in the transfer market is because Tony Bloom wants Brighton & Hove Albion to survive as a football club. This is why Barber and Bloom in nearly every interview says the club wants/needs to be sustainable. Of course transfer income means investment, it has up to this point and will continue like that.

Brighton signed two players in the 24-29 span last season, Igor and Dahoud, both hand picked by the manager you wanted to keep around. There was also four younger players bought in for the first team squad, Baleba, Pedro, Barco and Verbruggen. Roberto and his followers want players in the first category, club wants players in the latter.

Your idea that "at some point the club will need to have a core group of players aged 24-29" has no basis in reality. The only ways it can happen is if the players are too bad to make big money & glory in a big club, or if Tony Bloom sells the club to either some American property developer or some Arab oil nation. Then maybe we can keep a Caicedo until he's 29. As it stands and with sustainability (securing the future of the club) being the number one target, we'll have to settle for Dahouds (we have a very good chance of keeping him until he's 29, good times).

The world also isn't Football Manager. Players don't magically turn into shit because they turn 30. Players are not magically shit until they're 24.

And last summer we signed Dahoud for free and Igor for £15m. So whats the problem? The manager picked these players, these players are exactly in the category people ask for, so why aren't they key players? Why didn't this allegedly magic "buy finished products" trick work out?

Also, if you think its standard to sign players like Gross for £3m, you don't know anything about football. Its one of the best deals in PL history.

The club didn't want him to be in charge of who is coming in or not. He wanted Dahoud, Igor and Fati, and didn't want Baleba and Barco. Give me ONE DECENT ARGUMENT why Tony should have left our player recruitment to De Zerbi and his (by his own account) Youtube scouting? What is it from De Zerbis transfer involvement that you think is so much better than the transfer involvement from the owner & club, whose ideas you clearly despise?

Well said!

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I'm not opining on your overall analysis. I merely responded to your point about Gross, March, Dunk, Veltman, etc moving out of their peak, and the neglect of factoring in that others were moving into it. If your point is that we need to be breaking the stated* strategy of buying promising youngsters and experienced model pros and also buying those in their peak (which is one point you've made on this thread), then I don't accept it as a broad strategy. Nor do I accept that we have to keep hold of players that are in their peak years (which you've said in the post I'm responding to), for the very reason that we'll most likely get large sums for them -- and that'll be the reason that they are sold, ie if there's an offer that we can't turn down.
Players in their peak are very expensive and, as a club, we're having to 'fish in different pools' (a repeated Barberism) than our PL rivals. Not to put too fine a point on it, we've been remarkably successful in our strategy, and that's why I'm defending it. I also particularly like the promising youngsters we've had of late -- seeing them develop is what football fans pine for. I've also enjoyed Lallana's technique, Welbeck's all-round game and late flourishing, Milner's bloody-mindedness and sheer professionalism, etc.
Thanks for the stats on playing minutes, which I wasn't aware of and are interesting. I'll just say two things on them. First, I think that's a pretty decent mix, but would add that there's probably too many in the 32+ category and would agree that the peak (which sounds like 23-31 in these stats) could do with a somewhat higher % but would add that we really suffered from injuries in that: March for most of the season, Mitoma for half of it, Pervis for more than half of it, JPvH towards the end, Igor in and out a bit -- and Dahoud who started the season shipped out half-way through it.

Yeah agreed injuries are the major contributor to the breakdown of minutes.

But in reality we relied way too much on a smaller pool of experienced players than we should have done.
only 21 of the 25 available over 21 spots were taken up ( the lowest in the league).
With the bulk of those players being over 30 or under 23, plus a couple of others with a history of injury.
This was in a season guaranteed to be our longest of the Premier League era.

Contrary to the tone of my posts, I actually suspect the club are acutely aware of the deficiencies in the squad and will make the necessary calls to fix this.
The purpose of the recruitment strategy is to generate income to improve the quality of the squad, not to make profit for profit's sake.

 

[Han Solo]

I think we can all agree that we're a transit area rather than a final destination. All the decent players are just passing through. Guess it's the same for most clubs really. Player retention is the big challenge for clubs like us

Yes. Like it always has been everywhere, at least since Liverpool picked up every decent footballer in Scotland in the 1880s.

The main reason for this is because players want as much money as they can get, because they live in a capitalist society where money is more useful than a life of loyalty towards a club and city not really known to be the Mecca of football. The players want money and won't get it (to the extent the people around them tell them they deserve) in Brighton, because there's no £200m Coca Cola sponsorship targeted at the billions of Chinese BHAFC fans - there's no massive revenue like in the wealthiest clubs.

Brighton are top 5 in England when it comes to retaining players. The average Brighton player last season had spent 35.9 months in the club, fifth behind City, Liverpool, Palace and United. Its as good as it will get unless the academy is able to produce enough Premier League footballers like March and Dunk, more keen on staying than moving to a moderately big club (lets face it, both March and Dunk would have been off if Barca called).

But if player retention is the big challenge that needs to be overcome without some Saudi Rockefeller paying for it, we need to look at Athletic Bilbao. They make one big sale every year, and as you know they can't really buy that much players given they only sign Basque ones, so they spend it on wages instead. They're top 6 in La Liga in that category despite not being a globally supported club.

Looking at Athletic, all we need to replicate them is:

1. A stern belief that Sussex should not be part of England and that moving into this "England" thing would be slightly shameful.

2. A brilliant academy producing home grown players with strong feelings towards the club

3. A membership owned club with no profit interests

4. Players reluctant to abandon the fierce support they get.

5. Spending income on salaries to make all of the above more important than an additional 20% or somethin pay rise.

Some of which are impossible, some that are very unlikely, but none that involves signing random 24-29 year olds who weren't good enough to join a big club at the peak of their ability.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Yes. Like it always has been everywhere, at least since Liverpool picked up every decent footballer in Scotland in the 1880s.

The main reason for this is because players want as much money as they can get, because they live in a capitalist society where money is more useful than a life of loyalty towards a club and city not really known to be the Mecca of football. The players want money and won't get it (to the extent the people around them tell them they deserve) in Brighton, because there's no £200m Coca Cola sponsorship targeted at the billions of Chinese BHAFC fans - there's no massive revenue like in the wealthiest clubs.

Brighton are top 5 in England when it comes to retaining players. The average Brighton player last season had spent 35.9 months in the club, fifth behind City, Liverpool, Palace and United. Its as good as it will get unless the academy is able to produce enough Premier League footballers like March and Dunk, more keen on staying than moving to a moderately big club (lets face it, both March and Dunk would have been off if Barca called).

But if player retention is the big challenge that needs to be overcome without some Saudi Rockefeller paying for it, we need to look at Athletic Bilbao. They make one big sale every year, and as you know they can't really buy that much players given they only sign Basque ones, so they spend it on wages instead. They're top 6 in La Liga in that category despite not being a globally supported club.

Looking at Athletic, all we need to replicate them is:

1. A stern belief that Sussex should not be part of England and that moving into this "England" thing would be slightly shameful.

2. A brilliant academy producing home grown players with strong feelings towards the club

3. A membership owned club with no profit interests

4. Players reluctant to abandon the fierce support they get.

5. Spending income on salaries to make all of the above more important than an additional 20% or somethin pay rise.

Some of which are impossible, some that are very unlikely, but none that involves signing random 24-29 year olds who weren't good enough to join a big club at the peak of their ability.

 

[Machiavelli]

Yeah agreed injuries are the major contributor to the breakdown of minutes.

But in reality we relied too much on a smaller pool of experienced players than we would have done.
21 of the 25 available over 21 spots were taken ( the lowest in the league).
With the bulk of those players being over 30 or under 23, plus a couple of others with a history of injury.

Contrary to the tone of my posts, I actually suspect the club are acutely aware of the deficiencies in the squad and will make the necessary calls to fix this.
The purpose of the recruitment strategy is to generate income to improve the quality of the squad, not to make profit for profit's sake.

I agree with this especially your last sentence, but with one possible exception: what are the deficiencies in the squad? If it's players in 23-31 age group, my hunch is we'll only see a maximum of two, probably just one (KDH if we can get him?) and maybe even none.
In terms of squad deficiencies, this has just been shifted somewhat by FH's arrival. If he does go with the 343 formation, it's the hybrid CB/DCM and also the CM duo that we'll really need to target -- even more so if Pascal leaves

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I agree with this especially your last sentence, but with one possible exception: what are the deficiencies in the squad? If it's players in 23-31 age group, my hunch is we'll only see a maximum of two, probably just one (KDH if we can get him?) and maybe even none.
In terms of squad deficiencies, this has just been shifted somewhat by FH's arrival. If he does go with the 343 formation, it's the hybrid CB/DCM and also the CM duo that we'll really need to target -- even more so if Pascal leaves

The deficiency is experience more than anything else, particularly up top.
Decision making in the final third was not great towards the end of the season.
This was compounded by having overplayed so many of the younger players, and the older players having had incredibly long seasons (PG is looking at his 56th appearance if picked tonight).

IF PG goes then the club really do need to look at a different type of recruit.