We are (hopefully) staying up: the opposition

[BWFC_Insane]

I genuinely don't know what stability is in this division.

At the risk of stating the obvious, "stability" is not "progress", without the sort of massive investment that is frankly destabilising. Unless we can find some sort of magic solution (with a hat-tip to Neil Harris, although Millwall's owner has put £60-odd million in over the last few years) we ain't getting anywhere near the play-offs.

I guess Preston are stable, but Hemmings has ploughed money in there. Look at any team above us and they're usually either getting unsustainably bankrolled by a sugar daddy (or parachute payments) or they're for sale and thus unstable, like Ipswich.

I'm not picking a fight, but I honestly don't know how the future can be stable without us pouring money in at the top. And while I might not like everything he does, at the moment I'm hard-pushed to name someone who could maximise resources as well as Parky.

Or a manager who will put up with high expectations from fans against a backdrop of zero spent and their best players being sold.....

Lennon couldn't handle it. Parky to his credit has kept a lid on it, and tried to move the place forward. I'd probably agree that if we suddenly got a huge benefactor that we could get someone more used to competing at the top end of this league than Parky. But the problem is the pool of managers willing to come in to the situation we're in and be the fall guy for the owners (that is what is happening) are few and far between. Even fewer who will actually do a reasonable job along the way.

I'll be interested to see what Ken would do should we go down. Try and sack Parky and play the diversionary tactic. Keep him because he's scared to have a new manager who might rock the boat in public too much?

Ken patently won't want any criticism for whatever unfolds. What he will find if we go down is record low season ticket sales and attendances at the Macron, and based on his own calculations a drop in revenue of at least £6M. And a massive, massive job on his hands. If he thought it was hard before......

[Harry Genshaw]

I suppose it's whoever is responsible for the signings. Ken had a moan before about giving PP funds & those being spent on players who don't become starters.

Pre season we signed two full backs, three wingers and no central midfielders on permanent deals. Charsley, Walker, Obasi, Clough, Noone, Darby were all brought in and have made less than half a dozen starts between them.

You're allowed duds, not every signing is going to work out but in our position you're not allowed many.

Darby is the mystery for me. Bradford fans scoffed when we brought him to the club and said no way was he a championship player. Parky knew him, signed him then didn't play him after he looked bobbins. It was the same last season with Proctor

[BWFC_Insane]

I suppose it's whoever is responsible for the signings. Ken had a moan before about giving PP funds & those being spent on players who don't become starters.

Pre season we signed two full backs, three wingers and no central midfielders on permanent deals. Charsley, Walker, Obasi, Clough, Noone, Darby were all brought in and have made less than half a dozen starts between them.

You're allowed duds, not every signing is going to work out but in our position you're not allowed many.

Darby is the mystery for me. Bradford fans scoffed when we brought him to the club and said no way was he a championship player. Parky knew him, signed him then didn't play him after he looked bobbins. It was the same last season with Proctor

Is it a case that in embargo with severe wage restrictions imposed you take who you can get? I also don't think Parky was deciding on a lot of the deals.

Ken says a lot of things then suddenly backtracks. Why did he choose to slag the players off after Birmingham for example in public, then now say it doesn't matter what went before they need support and positivity?

He desperately wants to be seen as the man who saved the club and returned it somewhat to its former glories. He wants to repair his reputation in the game after the Southampton controversy. But I think he thought he'd have investment by now and would have made a tidy profit on sale of some or all the shares....hasn't worked out that way and I think next season could be very interesting ( for interesting read depressing beyond belief).

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Yeah, Darby looks a dud, but it sort of made sense at the time: we only had the more attacking Little at right-back, and Parky evidently felt he was a reliable sort. (He seems well-regarded off the pitch, even if his career started very badly here, arguably played out of position at wing-back and then in a back three.)

And we might not have signed him had we had more £. As reported by Nixon and others in late June, we wanted Fleetwood's right-back Conor McLaughlin, but he signed for Millwall instead (as happened with Bradford left-back James Meredith). Two weeks later, we signed Darby.

If there seems to be an element of chaos about recruitment, that might be two things – our, erm, operational logistics difficulties; and getting in cover. Players like Darby, Noone etc were calculated risks that haven't paid off, but presumably also haven't bankrupted us. They're there if needed, but we'd rather play other people. While it would be nice to have fierce competition for every place, it's better to have some than none at all.

It might be interesting to see if the need to have say 24 'senior' players is lessened in the future as the academy continues to punch above its weight. To bring up an example I've used before, with Alnwick and Howard out of contract in June but the highly-rated Turner tied down for longer, surely at some point we don't need Howard bench-warming. Had we had a promising right-back coming through - I dunno, a Joe Riley de nos jours - he might not have felt the need for Darby. But then, we'd just been promoted, and had he not got the extra body in and Little ripped his knee in early September, he'd be derided for naivety. It's a hard row to hoe.

[BWFC_Insane]

Gotta say I'm not feeling too confident about us staying up now. I thought that we'd lose to Wolves, but I wasn't expecting the utter capitulation in terms of performance that we reportedly demonstrated. I spent the weekend with a few season ticket holders who are generally more optimistic than I during our discussions and predictions, and they are starting to become quite worried. I'm leaning 70-30 towards us going down unless we win this weekend, which might just be enough to ensure our safety. Maybe.

We can beat Burton and Forest if we turn up, but the momentum is currently against us regardless of our current 2 point cushion - we're at the bottom of the 5 game form table and Burton are a worrying 9th. With them beating (and relegating) Sunderland the wind is thoroughly in their sails. They'll be wanting 6 points from the last two games, so they'll be coming at us with everything that they have. I hope that we do the same.

Rot seems to be setting in at the worst possible time unfortunately.

Think that's a fair summary. We hit the wall 2 games too soon. Point at Leeds and beat Brum and we'd all be dreaming of summer holidays.

Once the momentum goes its hard. Burton winning on Saturday was the kick in the nuts that finally had me accepting what our fate is. There was a tangible line of hope that if they lost or drew that in effect they'd not have much to play for and we'd still be able to finish above Barnsley. The trouble is now, an in form Burton with nothing to lose at home will have a right good go against our tired bodies, minds and off form lads. It just smells like an embarrassment to me. Like a really strong, bad smell.

[bristol_Wanderer3]

I was having this conversation at the Wolves game. Football even in the 2nd tier has now morphed into a scenario where success largely depends on having a benefactor. It is taken for granted that someone who has made a lot of money will see fit to plough a chunk of it into an organization that usually they have no natural connection to. Also, they are then expected to be held account in the way they operate that organisation to its 20000-30000 supporters who they have never known. Yes, at least in the 2nd tier there is always the chance of their investment quadrupling if they can get it right for a season, and for foreign owners there are often residual benefits ranging from something close to money laundering to reputational benefits to protection of assets from dangerous adversaries.

However, I still find it incredulous that 24 2nd tier clubs expect to find such an individual. For now, it seems to be a trend amongst the super wealthy that being an owner of an English football club even in the 2nd tier is a good thing to be. Will this continue? If you had say £100m - £500m would you spend £50m or more of it on a French/Spanish/American/Chinese club? And more pertinently who is going to be our benefactor, who will run the club as we would want it to be run, who will leave the club in a state as we would want to be left in, and who would make all the right moves whilst here to achieve success? It just seems to me, the conversation too easily becomes "we need investment". We are really asking for someone to see something enticing enough in our club to give a huge, unimaginable to most, amount of money away for our benefit. It amazes me that this person exists.

[BWFC_Insane]

I was having this conversation at the Wolves game. Football even in the 2nd tier has now morphed into a scenario where success largely depends on having a benefactor. It is taken for granted that someone who has made a lot of money will see fit to plough a chunk of it into an organization that usually they have no natural connection to. Also, they are then expected to be held account in the way they operate that organisation to its 20000-30000 supporters who they have never known. Yes, at least in the 2nd tier there is always the chance of their investment quadrupling if they can get it right for a season, and for foreign owners there are often residual benefits ranging from something close to money laundering to reputational benefits to protection of assets from dangerous adversaries.

However, I still find it incredulous that 24 2nd tier clubs expect to find such an individual. For now, it seems to be a trend amongst the super wealthy that being an owner of an English football club even in the 2nd tier is a good thing to be. Will this continue? If you had say £100m - £500m would you spend £50m or more of it on a French/Spanish/American/Chinese club? And more pertinently who is going to be our benefactor, who will run the club as we would want it to be run, who will leave the club in a state as we would want to be left in, and who would make all the right moves whilst here to achieve success? It just seems to me, the conversation too easily becomes "we need investment". We are really asking for someone to see something enticing enough in our club to give a huge, unimaginable to most, amount of money away for our benefit. It amazes me that this person exists.

It is a bizarre situation. I agree, and the fact is plenty of clubs will never find the person to do it, or the person they find is the wrong one!

But its hard to see how a business losing 3M a year currently can compete with the championship clubs in the top half, even some bottom half ones. Millwall are oft cited but their owner has sunk 62M quid into that club over the past few years. They've not spent huge money but clearly operating on a different financial level to ourselves. And as Reading are finding out, next season I'd not be at all surprised if Millwall end up nearer the bottom 6 than the top 6.

[irie Cee Bee]

Must say that I am not confident about survival. We have lost the plot completely recently, and if I were a Burton fan, I would be thinking a home win banker, especially with our away record, and the fact that they have already beaten us this season in our yard. Their players must feel that they have a good chance staying up. But I believe in miracles. And I live in hope.

[TANGODANCER]

There really is an answer to the whole mess that is professional football. Players and agents are costing clubs way more than they can ever feasibly justify their existence for. It wouldn't be acceptable in any other realm of finance or economy and only a very few big city clubs with foreign big-hitter owners in charge are causing the problems. Who operates on losses willingly, and how long can it go on? Okay, so players might not want to come to England for 27 million pounds a year when are told by agents "hold our for 50 million, I need another Bentley/Ferarri etc..(okay, slight exageration), but greed has ruined the game and the clubs and yet it's allowed to go on? Why?

[BWFC_Insane]

There really is an answer to the whole mess that is professional football. Players and agents are costing clubs way more than they can ever feasibly justify their existence for. It wouldn't be acceptable in any other realm of finance or economy and only a very few big city clubs with foreign big-hitter owners in charge are causing the problems. Who operates on losses willingly, and how long can it go on? Okay, so players might not want to come to England for 27 million pounds a year when are told by agents "hold our for 50 million, I need another Bentley/Ferarri etc..(okay, slight exageration), but greed has ruined the game and the clubs and yet it's allowed to go on? Why?

Its not greed. Money has come into the game, its a huge business. Whether film or TV or music or sport when there is a huge amount of money the stars of that entertainment will take a large chunk of it. And where there is money, there are people willing to invest....so you get rich owners...and so on....

Several premiership clubs are profitable now there is so much money, even with their ludicrous wages etc...

Then you get owners in the championship gambling on a premiership windfall....and the cycle goes on.

Its not players and agents or whatever, the game is what it is. You might like it or not. But we're where we are. The fact is that Bolton had their time in the sun a few seasons too early before the money became so big that they'd be set up. Mind look at Sunderland even then its no guarantee.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

We can beat Burton and Forest if we turn up, but the momentum is currently against us regardless of our current 2 point cushion - we're at the bottom of the 5 game form table and Burton are a worrying 9th. With them beating (and relegating) Sunderland the wind is thoroughly in their sails. They'll be wanting 6 points from the last two games, so they'll be coming at us with everything that they have. I hope that we do the same.

The trouble is now, an in form Burton with nothing to lose at home will have a right good go against our tired bodies, minds and off form lads.

Interesting concept, this coming-at-us and right-good-go business. Burton's three (three) home wins this season have come via possession rates of 53%, 40% and 30%. Their away wins have come with 50%, 47%, 40%, 32%, 32% and 24%. They're not exactly the domineering type.

And that might sound irrelevant - there's more than one way to score - but it might also, weirdly, work in our favour. They're not used to expecting to win. They like being the underdog. They hit on the break. So do we, normally, so when they came to ours and sat deep we didn't know what to do. Now, I'm not saying we should flip the tables and sit on our 18-yard line, but given the evidence of their 44 games so far it's quite possible that (1) they don't know how to dictate the game and (2) if they try to overload they may well be susceptible on the transition. It's another reason why I'd have Robinson and probably Little in the team – to get behind them on the break.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

I was having this conversation at the Wolves game. Football even in the 2nd tier has now morphed into a scenario where success largely depends on having a benefactor. It is taken for granted that someone who has made a lot of money will see fit to plough a chunk of it into an organization that usually they have no natural connection to. Also, they are then expected to be held account in the way they operate that organisation to its 20000-30000 supporters who they have never known. Yes, at least in the 2nd tier there is always the chance of their investment quadrupling if they can get it right for a season, and for foreign owners there are often residual benefits ranging from something close to money laundering to reputational benefits to protection of assets from dangerous adversaries.

However, I still find it incredulous that 24 2nd tier clubs expect to find such an individual. For now, it seems to be a trend amongst the super wealthy that being an owner of an English football club even in the 2nd tier is a good thing to be. Will this continue? If you had say £100m - £500m would you spend £50m or more of it on a French/Spanish/American/Chinese club? And more pertinently who is going to be our benefactor, who will run the club as we would want it to be run, who will leave the club in a state as we would want to be left in, and who would make all the right moves whilst here to achieve success? It just seems to me, the conversation too easily becomes "we need investment". We are really asking for someone to see something enticing enough in our club to give a huge, unimaginable to most, amount of money away for our benefit. It amazes me that this person exists.

Without putting too fine a point on it, he doesn't, otherwise he'd be here by now.

[boltonboris]

Several premiership clubs are profitable now there is so much money, even with their ludicrous wages etc...

Every single one of them isn't it? For the first time in Premier League history (since 1992) every Premier League club has more income, than expenditure

[irie Cee Bee]

We can beat Burton and Forest if we turn up, but the momentum is currently against us regardless of our current 2 point cushion - we're at the bottom of the 5 game form table and Burton are a worrying 9th. With them beating (and relegating) Sunderland the wind is thoroughly in their sails. They'll be wanting 6 points from the last two games, so they'll be coming at us with everything that they have. I hope that we do the same.

The trouble is now, an in form Burton with nothing to lose at home will have a right good go against our tired bodies, minds and off form lads.

Interesting concept, this coming-at-us and right-good-go business. Burton's three (three) home wins this season have come via possession rates of 53%, 40% and 30%. Their away wins have come with 50%, 47%, 40%, 32%, 32% and 24%. They're not exactly the domineering type.

And that might sound irrelevant - there's more than one way to score - but it might also, weirdly, work in our favour. They're not used to expecting to win. They like being the underdog. They hit on the break. So do we, normally, so when they came to ours and sat deep we didn't know what to do. Now, I'm not saying we should flip the tables and sit on our 18-yard line, but given the evidence of their 44 games so far it's quite possible that (1) they don't know how to dictate the game and (2) if they try to overload they may well be susceptible on the transition. It's another reason why I'd have Robinson and probably Little in the team – to get behind them on the break.

Or could it be the reason why we should NOT have them in the team because they are attacking players. I would want to think that our possession stats are similar to Burton for the games we have won against better teams. We stay home and counter. And when we play teams we believe we should beat, we attack and lose.

So we cancel each other out. So, do we stay with the players who keep the shape, A Taylor and Flanagan and wait for Alf to score that one chance on the counter, or play Little and Robinson who will attack and leave us open at the back for the counter. Little and Robinson do not know who to sit.Tough being the manager.

[Mar]

We can beat Burton and Forest if we turn up, but the momentum is currently against us regardless of our current 2 point cushion - we're at the bottom of the 5 game form table and Burton are a worrying 9th. With them beating (and relegating) Sunderland the wind is thoroughly in their sails. They'll be wanting 6 points from the last two games, so they'll be coming at us with everything that they have. I hope that we do the same.

The trouble is now, an in form Burton with nothing to lose at home will have a right good go against our tired bodies, minds and off form lads.

Interesting concept, this coming-at-us and right-good-go business. Burton's three (three) home wins this season have come via possession rates of 53%, 40% and 30%. Their away wins have come with 50%, 47%, 40%, 32%, 32% and 24%. They're not exactly the domineering type.

And that might sound irrelevant - there's more than one way to score - but it might also, weirdly, work in our favour. They're not used to expecting to win. They like being the underdog. They hit on the break. So do we, normally, so when they came to ours and sat deep we didn't know what to do. Now, I'm not saying we should flip the tables and sit on our 18-yard line, but given the evidence of their 44 games so far it's quite possible that (1) they don't know how to dictate the game and (2) if they try to overload they may well be susceptible on the transition. It's another reason why I'd have Robinson and probably Little in the team – to get behind them on the break.

Or could it be the reason why we should NOT have them in the team because they are attacking players. I would want to think that our possession stats are similar to Burton for the games we have won against better teams. We stay home and counter. And when we play teams we believe we should beat, we attack and lose.

So we cancel each other out. So, do we stay with the players who keep the shape, A Taylor and Flanagan and wait for Alf to score that one chance on the counter, or play Little and Robinson who will attack and leave us open at the back for the counter. Little and Robinson do not know who to sit.Tough being the manager.

Fairly certain we went with the whole cancel each other out approach against Birmingham and that didn't pay off. I would much prefer us to finish the season attacking and trying to win the game. Time will tell whether this becomes a must not lose game but as it stands I don't think we can rest on our laurels and hope that a draw is good enough.

[Mar]

We look nervous and not yet in the last chance saloon.

Parkinson and the team have put in a lot of good hard work so far this season. Lets go again and make sure that wasn't in vain.

[BWFC_Insane]

Several premiership clubs are profitable now there is so much money, even with their ludicrous wages etc...

Every single one of them isn't it? For the first time in Premier League history (since 1992) every Premier League club has more income, than expenditure

Possibly. I think some of those figures include "sponsorship deals" from owners etc which are the things keeping clubs in the black - artificially. From my understanding.

But yes the money is there generally.

[TANGODANCER]

I'm just hoping that the remaining matches are carried out in the spirit of the game, the teams give 100% and no "favours" occur. Barnsley will be hammer and tongs tonight to grab what might be their last lifeline, so we have to hope Forest don't see themselves as safely past the tape and having nothing more to do. Com,e on Forest...

[Prufrock]

I hate being nervous about a game we aren't even playing in.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I hate being nervous about a game we aren't even playing in.

Champions League on the telly, League One on the mind.