What was the trigger in our downward trend?

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

It’s a fair argument but we were consistently dogbrick at home and even some of the away wins defied the underlying numbers. A collapse in that away form was always coming while the habit of losing at home, started under Ange, continued unabated.

There was every chance, all other things being equal, that even if our away form normalised that our home form could also improve. Unfortunately we had a terrible manager who put out a team that gave the home fans absolutely nothing to cheer for (quite literally in the attempts stats) and I think that was a big part of why our home form continued to be bad.

To go from the parade to the sheer anxiety we’ve seen this season from both the players and fans was not the continuation of a trend but a very real thing to do with what was happening this season. The players weren’t bought in, and didn’t know how to fully execute, and the fans could see it.

 

[fernadez]

I just don’t agree. When we needed to win last year to secure our safety, we basically did. Then we had the opportunity this year for a fresh start. Then we started the season pretty well. Why, if it is all a hangover from last season, did we actually start quite well?

It's in adversity that the truth reveals itself.

I'm not saying it's a hangover I'm saying that losing over a period of time has been normalised. All our metrics trend downwards. We picked up points through attrition earlier in the season and that's how we won the cup. Any variance from that has seen us spanked.

 

[Robspur12]

I just don’t agree. When we needed to win last year to secure our safety, we basically did. Then we had the opportunity this year for a fresh start. Then we started the season pretty well. Why, if it is all a hangover from last season, did we actually start quite well?

There were no serious challengers to our premier league status due to the 3 clubs below us being so poor so it looks like all the gambles went right. But underlying that was a team that was on a downward trend in the league, 22 games lost 60+ goals conceded. Europe masked the league (like it has done this year) so the legend of Ange burns bright.

If Ange had started this season without Madison, Kulu and Solanke with little emphasis on defensive solidity I am certain the results would have continued from last season.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

It's in adversity that the truth reveals itself.

I'm not saying it's a hangover I'm saying that losing over a period of time has been normalised. All our metrics trend downwards. We picked up points through attrition earlier in the season and that's how we won the cup. Any variance from that has seen us spanked.

Fair enough. I’m not denying it’s the trend. I just think there have been various inflection points in the last two years with context around them that explain some of it, and also provide moments as to where we could have turned that trend around but didn’t.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

There were no serious challengers to our premier league status due to the 3 clubs below us being so poor so it looks like all the gambles went right. But underlying that was a team that was on a downward trend in the league, 22 games lost 60+ goals conceded. Europe masked the league (like it has done this year) so the legend of Ange burns bright.

If Ange had started this season without Madison, Kulu and Solanke with little emphasis on defensive solidity I am certain the results would have continued from last season.

I think if Ange had started with RKM and Simons he would have gotten more out of them than Frank did. We also probably wouldn’t have sold Brennan leaving us with zero right wingers to play. I also think he would have had Romero and VDV for more games and gotten results with them too. Probably not had a vendetta against Tel. In general I think the squad would have been more bought in to what he was asking them to do. I’m not saying, given everything that has happened to us and the league, that it all would have been rosey, but I think it would have been far better than what we saw.

Essentially I view Ange’s tenure as pre and post horrendous injury crisis. And then post Europa League prioritisation.

My question on Ange was always whether we would have gotten exposed more on set pieces this year. But I still think overall we’d have been in a far better position. Even just considering that his system and not having an unprecedented injury crisis means that we would likely still be able to flat track bully enough teams at home to at least be mid table.

 

[Robspur12]

I think if Ange had started with RKM and Simons he would have gotten more out of them than Frank did. We also probably wouldn’t have sold Brennan leaving us with zero right wingers to play. I also think he would have had Romero and VDV for more games and gotten results with them too. Probably not had a vendetta against Tel. In general I think the squad would have been more bought in to what he was asking them to do. I’m not saying, given everything that has happened to us and the league, that it all would have been rosey, but I think it would have been far better than what we saw.

Impossible to know for sure. But what is sinking us primarily ATM is we are shipping goals without the ability to reply. Maybe Ange would have started off outscoring the opposition but given Tudor has come in and those players haven't suddenly transformed, I have to wonder what Ange could have done differently especially as he had Tel for a season and struggled to get him performing consistently to the level we need.

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

Impossible to know for sure. But what is sinking us primarily ATM is we are shipping goals without the ability to reply. Maybe Ange would have started off outscoring the opposition but given Tudor has come in and those players haven't suddenly transformed, I have to wonder what Ange could have done differently especially as he had Tel for a season and struggled to get him performing consistently to the level we need.

He was forced to play Tel upfront alone during the injury crisis and then barely used him in the team when the first choice was selected once we started prioritising the Europa.

Tudor has come in when confidence is on the floor and unity is seemingly completely shot. He has his own set of special unique circumstances to deal with.

 

[fernadez]

I think if Ange had started with RKM and Simons he would have gotten more out of them than Frank did. We also probably wouldn’t have sold Brennan leaving us with zero right wingers to play. I also think he would have had Romero and VDV for more games and gotten results with them too. Probably not had a vendetta against Tel. In general I think the squad would have been more bought in to what he was asking them to do. I’m not saying, given everything that has happened to us and the league, that it all would have been rosey, but I think it would have been far better than what we saw.

Essentially I view Ange’s tenure as pre and post horrendous injury crisis. And then post Europa League prioritisation.

My question on Ange was always whether we would have gotten exposed more on set pieces this year. But I still think overall we’d have been in a far better position. Even just considering that his system and not having an unprecedented injury crisis means that we would likely still be able to flat track bully enough teams at home to at least be mid table.

I don't think his tenure can be boxed off like that. For me regardless of the buy in, the quality of the squad would be the same, and he'd still be without Son, Kulu and Maddison. I don't think there is a manager about that can get the % shift needed to turn our players from what they are into something better. First half today we was at near our max output and couldn't score, not down to tactics or belief (you saw what lack of belief looked like in the second half) but purely from us not having something to turn nearly into a goal. Neither Muani or Simons has shown they can do anything close to what Kane, Son, Alli, Kulu etc and now even Kudus could.

The only thing that is going to get us out is players returning from injury which is why I think that Kudus coming back is huge for us. If he can hit the ground running we have a chance. If Kulu was to come back (I know he isn't) those two returning would be enough to convince me we'd stay up.

 

[Silly McSilly Face]

Was it one specific thing? Or was it a perfect storm of injuries, lack of investment, lack of foresight/strategy?

For me it's a few things:

- Not finding a suitable replacement for Dembele
- Shocking purchases in the 19/20 season
- Not backing Poch and bringing Mourinho in

The injuries we have are obviously contributing to our relegation fight, but I strongly believe with players fit we'd be mid-table. Certainly not the heady heights of where we were 5 or 6 years ago.

Not backing Poch. Downwards trajectory was committed in that x2 windows with no signings.

Then its the answer Levy and execs chose to the question:
- Do we back Poch with a painful rebuild
OR
- Do we try and squeeze a few more seasons out of this jaded squad with a new manager?

Been on an express elavator to hell ever since GOING DOWN!

 

[MartyFunkhouser]

Not backing Poch. Downwards trajectory was committed in that x2 windows with no signings.

Then its the answer Levy and execs chose to the question:
- Do we back Poch with a painful rebuild
OR
- Do we try and squeeze a few more seasons out of this jaded squad with a new manager?

Been on an express elavator to hell ever since GOING DOWN!

For once we agree

You don't have Kane for 10 years and not plan for his exit (on Levy)

You don't do the same for Son and pretend Tel is class, which he isn't

You don't also, contrary, oust Levy who despite his faults not have a bad record of upper league finishes without a plan, you also don't get away with saying "it was all his fault" when love or hate it, his last act as Chairman was an EL win, and with all the "we want more" to be faced with relegation, thats poor.

We are going down because 100% we are now the club without form or back bone

The Championship is going to separate the men from the boys

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

I don't think his tenure can be boxed off like that. For me regardless of the buy in, the quality of the squad would be the same, and he'd still be without Son, Kulu and Maddison. I don't think there is a manager about that can get the % shift needed to turn our players from what they are into something better. First half today we was at near our max output and couldn't score, not down to tactics or belief (you saw what lack of belief looked like in the second half) but purely from us not having something to turn nearly into a goal. Neither Muani or Simons has shown they can do anything close to what Kane, Son, Alli, Kulu etc and now even Kudus could.

The only thing that is going to get us out is players returning from injury which is why I think that Kudus coming back is huge for us. If he can hit the ground running we have a chance. If Kulu was to come back (I know he isn't) those two returning would be enough to convince me we'd stay up.

Sure, I don’t disagree with you broadly but whichever way you slice it, no win in 13 games and being a point outside the relegation zone with 7 to play is not ‘what they are’. I think what is happening with the squad to be this bad, this consistently is something way bigger than that.

 

[Bishop]

Levy leaving. It was suggested 'Careful what you wish for'

The downfall started almost a decade before this event.

 

[DeanoAustin]

There was every chance, all other things being equal, that even if our away form normalised that our home form could also improve. Unfortunately we had a terrible manager who put out a team that gave the home fans absolutely nothing to cheer for (quite literally in the attempts stats) and I think that was a big part of why our home form continued to be bad.

To go from the parade to the sheer anxiety we’ve seen this season from both the players and fans was not the continuation of a trend but a very real thing to do with what was happening this season. The players weren’t bought in, and didn’t know how to fully execute, and the fans could see it.

I know we fundamentally disagree on this and I do respect your opinion and appreciate your articulation of it. But I do still disagree.

The underlying numbers for our away form were not sustainable. That was clear as day. We won a game 3-0 at Everton. I’ve no idea how. It wasn’t a good performance. Results were miles ahead of performances. The home form could have normalised but there was absolutely no indication it would. From early on under Frank, we looked terrible at home. Bournemouth, Chelsea, Wolves. All poisonous performances. So, bar City away, we’ve been fudging awful all season.

In a collapse this unprecedented, there is no one factor. There is an accumulation of many circumstances that create such a brickshow. Frank deserves quite a bit of blame but I think it’s hard to argue that Ange doesn’t. He brought us from two decades of top half, primarily top 6 finishes, to 17th. It’s a mind boggling drop off. And that trend continued this year. Therefore, for me, Ange has some culpability. Not a lot, but some.

 

[billyiddo]

There were no serious challengers to our premier league status due to the 3 clubs below us being so poor so it looks like all the gambles went right. But underlying that was a team that was on a downward trend in the league, 22 games lost 60+ goals conceded. Europe masked the league (like it has done this year) so the legend of Ange burns bright.

If Ange had started this season without Madison, Kulu and Solanke with little emphasis on defensive solidity I am certain the results would have continued from last season.

We were the 4th worst team in the league last season. Fact. The 3 teams worse than us have been replaced, so who's to say what our true position is.

The fact we're following up a 17th place finish with a likely 18th place says more than anyhing else what it is to me

 

[SissokoWasGood (BoL)]

I know we fundamentally disagree on this and I do respect your opinion and appreciate your articulation of it. But I do still disagree.

The underlying numbers for our away form were not sustainable. That was clear as day. We won a game 3-0 at Everton. I’ve no idea how. It wasn’t a good performance. Results were miles ahead of performances. The home form could have normalised but there was absolutely no indication it would. From early on under Frank, we looked terrible at home. Bournemouth, Chelsea, Wolves. All poisonous performances. So, bar City away, we’ve been fudging awful all season.

In a collapse this unprecedented, there is no one factor. There is an accumulation of many circumstances that create such a brickshow. Frank deserves quite a bit of blame but I think it’s hard to argue that Ange doesn’t. He brought us from two decades of top half, primarily top 6 finishes, to 17th. It’s a mind boggling drop off. And that trend continued this year. Therefore, for me, Ange has some culpability. Not a lot, but some.

I agree, there’s no one factor. And I do always try and see the other side of these debates. I think where I land on Ange is, if we prioritised the Europa, played weaker teams in the league, and then failed to beat Bodo or got utterly spanked in the final, I would have more sympathy for the idea that he normalised a lowering of standards. Because he made a bet, and if he wasn’t able to see through his end of the bargain, we would have been left with nothing, the players would have had nothing to show for it, and I think they would have been asking what it was all for.

As it was, he took the risk and succeeded. And whatever alchemy comes from his mix of inspiration, motivation, training, selection and other decision making, he did actually win. We ended a disastrous season as winners, as a champions league club, and with the players and the fanbase united.

So I think he bought the opportunity for a fresh start this season (be it with him or someone else) And what actually happened was that the players were effectively told last season didn’t mean anything, and they had to climb back up the mountain for someone far less inspirational, playing a far less enjoyable form of football, and who had zero experience of managing a club our size. So when the difficulties came, there was no foundation to fall back on. Because the board destroyed it.

It’s really less a point on Ange for me and more, there has been a lack of understanding of the human beings involved on the pitch and what they needed to be given. I think to go through what they went through, and then be told they have to fully get behind this whole new project that they quickly saw wasn’t going to stand up to scrutiny, it ruined the dynamics. And that’s really the only thing that right now explains a squad being this talented being in such bad form. It’s a human issue, it isn’t one of skill and I don’t believe is one of effort. It’s the intangible that makes a team a team, and we lost it.

 

[DeanoAustin]

I agree, there’s no one factor. And I do always try and see the other side of these debates. I think where I land on Ange is, if we prioritised the Europa, played weaker teams in the league, and then failed to beat Bodo or got utterly spanked in the final, I would have more sympathy for the idea that he normalised a lowering of standards. Because he made a bet, and if he wasn’t able to see through his end of the bargain, we would have been left with nothing, the players would have had nothing to show for it, and I think they would have been asking what it was all for.

As it was, he took the risk and succeeded. And whatever alchemy comes from his mix of inspiration, motivation, training, selection and other decision making, he did actually win. We ended a disastrous season as winners, as a champions league club, and with the players and the fanbase united.

So I think he bought the opportunity for a fresh start this season (be it with him or someone else) And what actually happened was that the players were effectively told last season didn’t mean anything, and they had to climb back up the mountain for someone far less inspirational, playing a far less enjoyable form of football, and who had zero experience of managing a club our size. So when the difficulties came, there was no foundation to fall back on. Because the board destroyed it.

It’s really less a point on Ange for me and more, there has been a lack of understanding of the human beings involved on the pitch and what they needed to be given. I think to go through what they went through, and then be told they have to fully get behind this whole new project that they quickly saw wasn’t going to stand up to scrutiny, it ruined the dynamics. And that’s really the only thing that right now explains a squad being this talented being in such bad form. It’s a human issue, it isn’t one of skill and I don’t believe is one of effort. It’s the intangible that makes a team a team, and we lost it.

They are all fair points mate and there’s merit to that argument.

I do think if we go down, there is much more to come out about what’s gone on this season. I think there will be a mini industry from this in terms of books, articles and morbid curiosity about how we handle relegation and The Championship. There are so many angles as to how we find ourselves here. Steady mismanagement since 2018 and gross mismanagement last season and this season. It’s truly mind boggling.

It’ll be a case study for generations to come on cataclysmic mismanagement of a massive sporting organisation.