I knew you'd come in handy at some point...Shame, would have made for an interesting headline, 'Slot for the Cottagers'.
It's our time.
Ten Bob Tony,1.30 Epsom,thanking you
Transfer Rumours Summer 2026 Transfer Thread…
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Ten Bob Tony,1.30 Epsom,thanking you
I don’t buy that the prem is objectively weaker than it has been in years gone by. Yes there’s lots of teams in flux but the ones down there last year have the financial resources to make sure that doesn’t happen again. It looks like we’re gonna need one of the established clubs (or Leeds) to have a poor season, but it can happen - not so long ago wolves were considered established prem team
Last edited:
That could be good for us. Unwanted disruption for Ipswich and I'm not convinced McKenna would be good for Fulham or at the least might well take time to settle in there.
Would love to have Delap back but I doubt it'll happen irrespective.
Think Delap is as good as we can do domestically. Perhaps better value abroad for strikers with better goal records but they come in without experience in the premier league. Atleast we know Delap can handle the physicality
Which year in the last ten would you say has been weaker when it comes to teams in transition with a new manager, and teams that typically battle relegation being in Europe adding games to their schedule?
I said I don’t think it’s objectively weaker and you’ve replied by asking me to name a weaker season in relation to your very specific set of criteria. The reason I don’t think it’s weaker is because spurs and forest finished 16th and 17th. History tells us bigger teams having a poor season are able to recover because they have the resources and can facilitate higher wages. Spending power, quality of squad, revenue are bigger predictors of success than if a team has long-standing manager or if they’re in Europe. The biggest indicator of a team that’ll struggle is a ‘smaller’ club, with less resources, who’ve finished near the relegation zone the season before.
It's not a specific set of criteria it's a reason for why it's the weakest season. There is the most disruption and change as well as the largest pool of European sides. That's objectively the case.
Its not the most stupid of plans. People believe Ipswich knew exactly what they were doing last time around. Its risky but if you can go up and strengthen with players that will get you back up should you slip out of the prem the year you come back you are much better for it.
Burnley somehow meffed it up this season despite walking the Champ with a solid squad.
If you’re having to specify ‘when it comes to’ at the start of your argument, it’s clearly because you’re introducing parameters to the argument. You can say the league has most disruption in recent times and largest number of teams in Europe, but that doesn’t mean the league is objectively weaker, because as I’ve just said, that’s not the biggest predictor of relegation. The teams most likely to go down aren’t teams new to Europe or those with managerial changes, it’s the teams that struggled the season before and don’t have the resources to get themselves out of it. That’s why I disagree with you saying the league is ‘objectively weaker’, because in terms of what matter most to survival, it isn’t
OK so you would say Palace, forest and Leeds who were around the relegation places may well be in trouble again?
I'm not sure by your metrics how any season can be stronger or weaker if the main risk of relegation is determined by being at risk of relegation previously. Clearly seasons can be distinguished so looking at other factors is pretty relevant.
I wasn't setting parameters, again I was stating the key indicators that can be measured. Look at Leicester winning the league and dissect the set of factors that led that to happening for instance.
This began because GFAW asked for a subset of teams at risk of going down, which was then dismissed "just cos".
I'd be interested if we DO stay up, if the rationale then applies to us, that there's zero chance of relegation because of the same reasons now being applied to why Sunderland, forest, Leeds, Palace or Fulham can't go down.
Just not sure why some are so desperate to insist we're going down already.
Said before, id rather us go for Evan Ferguson....
He's had an awful 18 months not sure he'll do much good. Would be a bit of a Danny Graham hit and hope.
You said the league is objectively weaker - it isn’t. It may objectively have more teams needing a new manager or more teams in Europe and so you think it’s weaker, but that’s subjective and not actually what matters most historically. I’d rather have as many teams as close to relegation the season before who don’t have the advantages of a big club and are less likely to recover.
So the fact Sunderland are in their second season and competing on multiple fronts will have absolutely no bearing on the relegation picture next season, nor Fulham picking a new manager and needing to identify a new creative outlet, because neither were in danger of relegation last season? Fair enough.
It’s nearly 1am for you and you’re arguing with strangers on the internet because you have to be right all the time. Go to bed.
Last I checked we were having a discussion, you're welcome to offer an input or just go for a personal dig if you'd like. Last two words of my previous post may indicate how mild the discussion was.