[Albion] Our “big spend”

[Mellotron]

Agree broadly with the tone of this thread. I don't know if it's getting older or what, but I am supremely relaxed about the Albion at the moment. Our continued existence doesn't hinge on where we finish this season, whether it's 8th or 12th.

We are an incredibly well run club, and I am 100% confident we will see European football again within the next 5-10 years. Managers and players will come and go, but as long as we have Tony I'm very confident we will continue to compete more years than not.

First year for Fabian, everyone needs to give him time to learn and grow into the role.

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

The sort of team that has only lost twice all season when they’ve conceded the first goal? That sort of team?

Yes, the same team that's had 4 dire results in the last 4 games, and has now picked up the habit of conceding twice in quick succession

 

[Guy Fawkes]

This post is copied from an older thread, in response to someone saying they expected us to be dominating games after our £200m “massive” spend.

I thought I’d repost it here because I just keep seeing this come back again and again.

The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level as well as invest in the future. That was a maintenance spend, not a Chelsea style £1.2bn attempt to buy the league spend.

We had to replace Caicedo, Mac Allister, Mwepu, Undav, Groß and others going back to Trossard who hadn’t really been truly replaced (RDZ’s big peeve) as well as the next development signings.

If we look at the signings we’ve made,

Cozier-Duberry (19) - free, loaned, prospect
Yalcouyé (18) - €7m, loaned, prospect
Osman (19) - €19.5m, loaned, prospect
O’Riley (23) - €29.5m, just returned from injury
Kadioglu (24) - €30m, injured
Gruda (20) - €31.5m
Wieffer (24) - €32m
Minteh (19) - €35m
Georginio (22) - €45.7m

Average age of the players we signed is 20.89 years old. Three signings worth €26.5m went out on loan immediately.

It is extremely clear to me that the (relatively, for a club our size) big spend was about investing in the next batch of young players to develop and improve with time and first team experience with us.

We weren’t buying a European campaign or title challenge (lol), we were signing what was absolutely necessary to a) try and maintain our position in the top half of the league and try for Europe and b) give these young players a platform to shine and hopefully be the next big money sale out of the door in order for the club to be self-sufficient financially.

I think it was an excellent window of superb business, but one which many people won’t recognise until like - as in the past with Mac Allister, Bissouma, Caicedo, Baleba and the rest - the players come good due to first team exposure and hard work on the training ground.

I am very sorry that people got confused about exactly what our £200m was getting us. Chelsea spent over £200m on two central midfielders and finished mid table last season.

Add in that previous players we've had that went on to do well for us and then move for good money took time to reach their best for us. Some learnt and improved whilst they were out on loan (like Mitoma) whilst others took a season or 2 to reach their level / fulfill their potential here (like Bissouma, Mac Allister, Baleba, etc...)

Our business model is to buy raw talent, and develop them. That will take time, and they are bound to be more inconsistent and make mistakes as they learn and develop. That is why they are with us and not gone straight to a very top team that consistently challenges for cups and titles. Someone like Chelsea will be buying the more complete player who has already gone through that development stage elsewhere and therefore be more consistent, but costs a lot more money for them to buy as a result.

We are still following our business plan of buying players with potential, developing them and either benefit from that improvement in our first XI, or by cashing in and making a profit that can be re-invested. We know we are unable to compete directly with the likes of Chelsea in terms of spending and our ability to attract the very best players to pick us over more established teams that traditionally compete at the very top of their divisions.

Our plan has been to try to become an established top 10 side, which occasionally qualifies for European football and that wouldn't change just because of how much we spent last summer.

Fans making the environment hostile, critising the young players and putting added pressure on them and therefore hindering their progress is counter productive. Yes we will be more inconsistent as a result, yes we will drop points when it looks like we shouldn't, and players will make mistakes and we will get punished but they will be learning from that anyway and that experience will be part of their learning curve that makes them a better player.

 

[Han Solo]

I barely mention the £200m. Its investment for the future.

If we take the abstract thought of "on-field value" I think its somewhere around +/- £0 this season. In order to make our investments grow we have to wisely nurture them, meaning we use players who aren't entirely ready for the Premier League yet. For instance, replacing Gross with players like Rutter and O'Riley is a -£20m i in terms of current "on-field value" imo, but in time we hope and think this will turn into a £20m improvement as the players improve and their value increase.

We're in year one now. Last year should have been, but the manager was reluctant and we brought in a few older players rather than a bunch of youngsters.

This means we're a little behind schedule - I think we could qualifiy for Europe every three years or so, but maybe even next year is too soon, we'll see - and its likely going to be a bit similar to the 21/22 season, except we have a bit higher starting point (meaning the board likely would not tolerate a relegation battle).

I've said in a lot of places that Brighton will very likely finish somewhere between 8th and 12th this season, and IMO thats all we could realistically ask from this inexperienced team.

If we look at these £200m in three years and saw nothing come out of it, sure, then questions can be asked. But now... they mean very little.

 

[Justice]

The way I see it is that we have to do our bit as fans. We can't offer huge wages or massive oven ready signings, it's just not practical.

What we can offer though is time and patience, we are not entitled fans demanding instant success. We can build a team and build experience.

We have to hold our nerve through the rough patches though.

The last started ambition I remember is becoming a top ten club with the occasional foray in Europe. We got a bit excited with our start to the season so we need to recalibrate a little and look back at the plan. At the start of the season most would have been happy to acknowledge a rebuilding period and accept a mid table finish.

In the latest Barber interview he mentions the top ten ambitions and now that bar is a little higher as we’ve tasted Europe and want more of the same.
Unfortunately we won’t achieve anything playing like we are Southampton was unacceptable a team every other team beats fairly easily
and they looked the most likely to win?
We’ve been on a bad run ever since, excuses galore on here, no wonder Potter said if I wanted an easy life I would have stayed at Brighton.

When everyone was getting over excited about beating City I said it means nothing if we can’t build on it.
Glasner was way too smart for Hurz had him in his pocket, embarrassing.

Now the £200m is another excuse do me a favour.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I don't think the majority of disappointed fans i spoke to on Sunday demand instant success. Just a team with a bit of fight, creativity and a game plan, rather than one ready to capitulate at any second

So you think we just sat back and waited the game out on Sunday, and that we weren't looking to try to get back into the game at all ?

So it wasn't a case that we were trying, but like a lot of teams (even the very best ones) they struggle to break down a low block where 3 players are going to meet the player who receives the ball, blocking the shot on goal but also the channels that they could use to play progressive passes through ? So we didn't commit a lot of players forward to try to break it down, looking for a way back into the match ? (why else would we have gone with 3 at the back and 1 dm if we weren't committing players forward looking for goals ? or do you think we should have gone with even less cover at the back and thrown even more players forward trying to break down that low block that's problematic for so many teams to do ?)

The trouble with pressing so high up the pitch and trying to break that low block down is that you leave a lot of space for the opposition to use to counter attack, which is why Palace were able to on a few occasions in the 2nd half but that was because we were trying to get back into the game and not because we lacked fight or were ready to capitulate at any second.
We still created some chances (like Dunk's header, Enciso's efforts, etc...) despite that low block so that's hardly lacking any creativity. Pressing hard and committing so many forward is hardly giving up and lacking fight (we would have just strolled through the rest of the game with hardly anyone going forward if we had) and being ready to capitulate? or taking a risk to try to achieve a result ? high risk gambling to try to force our way back into the contest that would still be lost if we hadn't tried.

 

[Justice]

So you think we just sat back and waited the game out on Sunday, and that we weren't looking to try to get back into the game at all ?

So it wasn't a case that we were trying, but like a lot of teams (even the very best ones) they struggle to break down a low block where 3 players are going to meet the player who receives the ball, blocking the shot on goal but also the channels that they could use to play progressive passes through ? So we didn't commit a lot of players forward to try to break it down, looking for a way back into the match ? (why else would we have gone with 3 at the back and 1 dm if we weren't committing players forward looking for goals ? or do you think we should have gone with even less cover at the back and thrown even more players forward trying to break down that low block that's problematic for so many teams to do ?)

The trouble with pressing so high up the pitch and trying to break that low block down is that you leave a lot of space for the opposition to use to counter attack, which is why Palace were able to on a few occasions in the 2nd half but that was because we were trying to get back into the game and not because we lacked fight or were ready to capitulate at any second.
We still created some chances (like Dunk's header, Enciso's efforts, etc...) despite that low block so that's hardly lacking any creativity. Pressing hard and committing so many forward is hardly giving up and lacking fight (we would have just strolled through the rest of the game with hardly anyone going forward if we had) and being ready to capitulate? or taking a risk to try to achieve a result ? high risk gambling to try to force our way back into the contest that would still be lost if we hadn't tried.

I think he means not conceding goals like an under 11 side. We had a spell second half until Glasner took off Eze, Mateta and packed the middle of the park to nullify us completely.
We huffed puffed and then conceded another.

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Urgh, FACTS. Where's the fun in that?

 

[Dibdab]

The only player on that list that really concerns me as a huge gamble is Minteh. I honestly cant remember the last time a player with his technical limitations was out on the field playing for us. Other than that all the rest are likely to be decent acquisitions for the future

 

[portslade seagull]

Signing multiple wingers and ignoring the weaknesses in defence has cost us. Presently if TB is looking for a return on the players signed he will be a little disappointed. Hard work on the training ground is required. On 2nd thoughts not too hard as they seem to keep picking up injuries

 

[Terry Butcher Tribute Act]

The only player on that list that really concerns me as a huge gamble is Minteh. I honestly cant remember the last time a player with his technical limitations was out on the field playing for us. Other than that all the rest are likely to be decent acquisitions for the future

I think you've got to consider that he's only just turned 20. If we'd had someone from our youth team come in at that age with lightning pace, score a couple of goals in his first 10 games in the Prem, we'd be hyping him as a 70 million player.

Which i guess is the valid observation here

 

[Dibdab]

I think you've got to consider that he's only just turned 20. If we'd had someone from our youth team come in at that age with lightning pace, score a couple of goals in his first 10 games in the Prem, we'd be hyping him as a 70 million player.

Which i guess is the valid observation here

Its the inability to do the basic requirements of control a football that worry me.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

This post is copied from an older thread, in response to someone saying they expected us to be dominating games after our £200m “massive” spend.

I thought I’d repost it here because I just keep seeing this come back again and again.

The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level as well as invest in the future. That was a maintenance spend, not a Chelsea style £1.2bn attempt to buy the league spend.

We had to replace Caicedo, Mac Allister, Mwepu, Undav, Groß and others going back to Trossard who hadn’t really been truly replaced (RDZ’s big peeve) as well as the next development signings.

If we look at the signings we’ve made,

Cozier-Duberry (19) - free, loaned, prospect
Yalcouyé (18) - €7m, loaned, prospect
Osman (19) - €19.5m, loaned, prospect
O’Riley (23) - €29.5m, just returned from injury
Kadioglu (24) - €30m, injured
Gruda (20) - €31.5m
Wieffer (24) - €32m
Minteh (19) - €35m
Georginio (22) - €45.7m

Average age of the players we signed is 20.89 years old. Three signings worth €26.5m went out on loan immediately.

It is extremely clear to me that the (relatively, for a club our size) big spend was about investing in the next batch of young players to develop and improve with time and first team experience with us.

We weren’t buying a European campaign or title challenge (lol), we were signing what was absolutely necessary to a) try and maintain our position in the top half of the league and try for Europe and b) give these young players a platform to shine and hopefully be the next big money sale out of the door in order for the club to be self-sufficient financially.

I think it was an excellent window of superb business, but one which many people won’t recognise until like - as in the past with Mac Allister, Bissouma, Caicedo, Baleba and the rest - the players come good due to first team exposure and hard work on the training ground.

I am very sorry that people got confused about exactly what our £200m was getting us. Chelsea spent over £200m on two central midfielders and finished mid table last season.

What does that bit mean? 'The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level.'

What level do you mean? Last years? 2022/23?
I assume 2022/23 because you mention the loss of Ally Mac, Caicedo, Trossard, Mwepu as well as Gross who played both seasons. That squad finished 6th with Trossard only playing half the season and mwepu only playing a handful. So the 200million spend (and on your numbers, the six players in the first team squad come to a little over 200m euros) is essentially to replace Ally Mac, Caicedo and Gross(and actually, Gilmour - although again he barely played in 2023). So six players at an incredible cost to replace 3.

It's not difficult to see why expectations were raised and I think it's perfectly reasonable to mention the money spent.

The Squad (according to wiki)in 2022/23 was:

Sanchez, Steele, McGill

Dunk, Colwill, Webster, JPVH, Estupiinian, Veltman, Lamptey, Offiah

Solly, Ally Mac, Caicedo, an injurred Moder, Lallana, Sarmiento, Mitoma, Ayari, Gilmour, Buonanotte

Welbeck, Enciso, Undav, Ferguson

The squad now is:

Ver Bruggen, Steele, ?

Dunk, Igor, JPVH, Webster, Estupinian, Veltman, Lamptey, Kadioglu

Mitoma, March(injured), Adingra, Minteh, Gruda, O'Riley, Wieffer, Milner, (a fit) Moder, Ayari, Baleba, Hinshelwood

Welbeck, Pedro, Enciso, Ferguso, Georginio

(Buonanotte, Sarmiento both out on loan.)

On paper that looks at least as strong as 2022/23 so again it's easy to see why expectation has been raised. If it's as strong or stronger than the squad that finished 6th then why wouldn't people expect a similar or even better effort this time?

There are mitigating factors as to why we haven't done as well as some(most?) might have hoped but I don't think your argument is one of them and I think it does the ambition of Tony Bloom and the club a mild disservice.

 

[dwayne]

The only player on that list that really concerns me as a huge gamble is Minteh. I honestly cant remember the last time a player with his technical limitations was out on the field playing for us. Other than that all the rest are likely to be decent acquisitions for the future

The reallllly mad thing is, Mr Bloom himself said he was most excited about Minteh out of all summer signings !!!

 

[jcdenton08]

The reallllly mad thing is, Mr Bloom himself said he was most excited about Minteh out of all summer signings !!!

Finding his feet in the best league in the world. Looked good in pre-season and already has a couple of well taken PL goals. I share Tony’s excitement for what Minteh can offer us in the coming seasons.

 

[LamieRobertson]

Finding his feet in the best league in the world. Looked good in pre-season and already has a couple of well taken PL goals. I share Tony’s excitement for what Minteh can offer us in the coming seasons.

in addition I’ve heard Smug Ed a few times say how they really didn’t want to lose him (Which must say something) but that they had to because of all the fair play stuff

 

[Littlemo]

On paper that looks at least as strong as 2022/23 so again it's easy to see why expectation has been raised. If it's as strong or stronger than the squad that finished 6th then why wouldn't people expect a similar or even better effort this time?

Does it look stronger than 2022/23 though? I honestly see how or why we all seem to think that. Most are players we don’t know from other leagues, who all have to either get up to speed with the league and still haven’t, or kids who need developed.

The squad in 2022/23 had a lot more PL experience in it, and just more football experience in general. I think it looks significantly stronger tbh and I think that’s what we are seeing as well.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

This post is copied from an older thread, in response to someone saying they expected us to be dominating games after our £200m “massive” spend.

I thought I’d repost it here because I just keep seeing this come back again and again.

The spend was to bring the squad back up to the current level as well as invest in the future. That was a maintenance spend, not a Chelsea style £1.2bn attempt to buy the league spend.

We had to replace Caicedo, Mac Allister, Mwepu, Undav, Groß and others going back to Trossard who hadn’t really been truly replaced (RDZ’s big peeve) as well as the next development signings.

If we look at the signings we’ve made,

Cozier-Duberry (19) - free, loaned, prospect
Yalcouyé (18) - €7m, loaned, prospect
Osman (19) - €19.5m, loaned, prospect
O’Riley (23) - €29.5m, just returned from injury
Kadioglu (24) - €30m, injured
Gruda (20) - €31.5m
Wieffer (24) - €32m
Minteh (19) - €35m
Georginio (22) - €45.7m

Average age of the players we signed is 20.89 years old. Three signings worth €26.5m went out on loan immediately.

It is extremely clear to me that the (relatively, for a club our size) big spend was about investing in the next batch of young players to develop and improve with time and first team experience with us.

We weren’t buying a European campaign or title challenge (lol), we were signing what was absolutely necessary to a) try and maintain our position in the top half of the league and try for Europe and b) give these young players a platform to shine and hopefully be the next big money sale out of the door in order for the club to be self-sufficient financially.

I think it was an excellent window of superb business, but one which many people won’t recognise until like - as in the past with Mac Allister, Bissouma, Caicedo, Baleba and the rest - the players come good due to first team exposure and hard work on the training ground.

I am very sorry that people got confused about exactly what our £200m was getting us. Chelsea spent over £200m on two central midfielders and finished mid table last season.

I agree with your points as well. These players were largely signed for the seasons to come and as a general point anyone teen or early 20's we should always be thinking they are for the future.

But as often seems to happen, our best laid plans have gone tits up to a degree, because we've lost a raft of senior players and our mid age players to injury, which means we're having now to go in big games against muscular teams with a young side. We're have better players than Palace, but if we're giving away height and weight all over the pitch, we're going to lose a lot of 1 v 1's, as it transpired.

I don't think we should regret the investment in young talent. But I think the club should be realistic and actually the players should be realistic, that if we're getting beaten at home to Palace, the fans are not in that moment going to be happy clappy about always looking years and years ahead. We won't turn toxic like Wolves or Everton, but if the club wants to protect the young players, then I think one or two more mid age players and fewer young players in similar positions would have been wise. Not every signing needs to have the chance to turn a 1000% profit. In writing this I acknowledge the appalling luck we've had with injuries. But then we had it last year as well, so is it even luck?

 

[Greg Bobkin]

I've not read all the comments, but the overall point is one I've made a lot of times when people bang on on about the £200m being spent. As well as loans and injuries, the other thing to factor in is that some of the signings were made with FFP in mind (other clubs' issues with it, as opposed to Brighton falling foul of it). I'm. sure TB or PB said that it was rare to have a window such as that one and the spending would settle back down in the next few windows.

 

[Surrey Phil]

An astonishing £193 million net was spent bringing in nine new players in the summer and yet when you look at profit and loss over the past five years, the Albion are still in profit by nearly £39 million. This is testament to Tony Bloom’s genius!