Championship | 22/23 Season

[TigerTedd]

3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

8 teams are in receipt of parachute payments almost every year. If all teams were of similar ability, on average, you'd expect 1 parachute team to be promoted.
But, not all teams are equal. Just like you'd expect the 3 sides promoted from L1 to be in the lower end of the table, perhaps 2 to get relegated? Or like you can expect Huddersfield (back where the were before Corberan), Blackpool, Birmingham, Hull, etc to be in and around the relegation spots
Surely a team recently relegated from the PL, is typically a bigger draw to players than one who has been in the Championship for a decade, or never even been in the PL at all? Signings from the PL willing to give them a season or two to get back up before departing too (similar to the likes of Knight and Bird sticking with us in L1). That's without considering the financial disparity.

How many parachute teams earning promotion is fair? It's currently 1.30 teams relegated from the PL return to the PL within 3 seasons. The equivalent for L1-Championship is 1.46 over the past 13 seasons. In those 13 seasons, the following are yet to return since parachute payments have ended: Portsmouth, Birmingham, Blackpool, Blackburn, Bolton, Wigan, Reading, QPR, Hull, Boro, Sunderland, Swansea, Stoke, Cardiff, Huddersfield.

Championship-PL is actually fairer than L1-Championship.

You make a good point. It is fair to assume they’d be in the mix, parachute payments or not.
and we’re one of those teams now. I know we’re not allowed to actively say it, but we’re all thinking we should be straight back up, and so are probably half the league, so that’s only 2 spaces to fight for.

League 1 must be a pain in the arse for clubs like burton now, so many big clubs are down here, it’s hard work to compete with Ipswich, Sheffield Wednesday, Sunderland til this season, etc.

but then no one said promotion was going to be easy, so maybe everyone should quit winging and get on with it, like forest last season.

or, I might float the idea of no promotion and no relegation within one season. I wonder if something like that would work practically, so you’re immune from relegation, but also can’t get promoted in your first year after relegation, so it’s a different 6 clubs swapping each season. 

it would be glorious chaos. 

[Foreveram]

League one is a natural level for clubs like Burton and Wycombe, anything above is a bonus.

[Srg]

18 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

League one is a natural level for clubs like Burton and Wycombe, anything above is a bonus.

League 1 is way above Burton’s natural level. 

[Bris Vegas]

3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

8 teams are in receipt of parachute payments almost every year. If all teams were of similar ability, on average, you'd expect 1 parachute team to be promoted.
But, not all teams are equal. Just like you'd expect the 3 sides promoted from L1 to be in the lower end of the table, perhaps 2 to get relegated? Or like you can expect Huddersfield (back where the were before Corberan), Blackpool, Birmingham, Hull, etc to be in and around the relegation spots
Surely a team recently relegated from the PL, is typically a bigger draw to players than one who has been in the Championship for a decade, or never even been in the PL at all? Signings from the PL willing to give them a season or two to get back up before departing too (similar to the likes of Knight and Bird sticking with us in L1). That's without considering the financial disparity.

How many parachute teams earning promotion is fair? It's currently 1.30 teams relegated from the PL return to the PL within 3 seasons. The equivalent for L1-Championship is 1.46 over the past 13 seasons. In those 13 seasons, the following are yet to return since parachute payments have ended: Portsmouth, Birmingham, Blackpool, Blackburn, Bolton, Wigan, Reading, QPR, Hull, Boro, Sunderland, Swansea, Stoke, Cardiff, Huddersfield.

Championship-PL is actually fairer than L1-Championship.

It’s only in recent years with heightened PL money where it has become really evident.

Our 2013-14 side was just as good or better than those who came down. And it remained like that until Newcastle’s drop.

West Brom were once labelled a yo-yo team.

But in recent years Fulham and Norwich have taken that to another level. Watford and Bournemouth are getting there.

Mel Morris tried to justify his mad spending as competing with parachute payment clubs. But that was just a poor excuse because it wasn’t needed in 2015.

But fast forward to 2019 onwards and the only way somebody like Birmingham can challenge is by either doing a Brentford, or spending a lot.

 

[Ghost of Clough]

2 minutes ago, Srg said:

League 1 is way above Burton’s natural level. 

And Wycombe's. This is only their 16th season at this level, having been in non-League until the 90's.
Burton didn't join the Football League until 15 years later, and have still had twice as many seasons in the Championship.

[Ghost of Clough]

3 minutes ago, Bris Vegas said:

It’s only in recent years with heightened PL money where it has become really evident.

Our 2013-14 side was just as good or better than those who came down. And it remained like that until Newcastle’s drop.

West Brom were once labelled a yo-yo team.

But in recent years Fulham and Norwich have taken that to another level. Watford and Bournemouth are getting there.

Mel Morris tried to justify his mad spending as competing with parachute payment clubs. But that was just a poor excuse because it wasn’t needed in 2015.

But fast forward to 2019 onwards and the only way somebody like Birmingham can challenge is by either doing a Brentford, or spending a lot.

So the years which Covid made the financial difference between clubs even greater?

[GenBr]

3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

8 teams are in receipt of parachute payments almost every year. If all teams were of similar ability, on average, you'd expect 1 parachute team to be promoted.
But, not all teams are equal. Just like you'd expect the 3 sides promoted from L1 to be in the lower end of the table, perhaps 2 to get relegated? Or like you can expect Huddersfield (back where the were before Corberan), Blackpool, Birmingham, Hull, etc to be in and around the relegation spots
Surely a team recently relegated from the PL, is typically a bigger draw to players than one who has been in the Championship for a decade, or never even been in the PL at all? Signings from the PL willing to give them a season or two to get back up before departing too (similar to the likes of Knight and Bird sticking with us in L1). That's without considering the financial disparity.

How many parachute teams earning promotion is fair? It's currently 1.30 teams relegated from the PL return to the PL within 3 seasons. The equivalent for L1-Championship is 1.46 over the past 13 seasons. In those 13 seasons, the following are yet to return since parachute payments have ended: Portsmouth, Birmingham, Blackpool, Blackburn, Bolton, Wigan, Reading, QPR, Hull, Boro, Sunderland, Swansea, Stoke, Cardiff, Huddersfield.

Championship-PL is actually fairer than L1-Championship.

Wonderful statistics, but it doesn't change the fact that two parachute teams have consistently been promoted for the last several years.

Players are more likely to join relegated sides because they are allowed to spend a lot more money. Yeh they might think they have a good chance of getting promotion, but money is first and foremost the biggest draw. Relegated teams get tens of millions of pounds in parachutes and they are allowed to lose far more money within FFP. Completely distorting the competition and frankly ruining it. Even if you wanted to compete on spending you are not allowed to.

You are completely missing the point. Its not about the number of teams getting promoted. Its the fact that one team can field a team worth tens of millions of pounds where everyone else has to make due with £10. 

[Bris Vegas]

12 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

So the years which Covid made the financial difference between clubs even greater?

I could be wrong, but the PL announced a major deal with Sky and BT for the 2017-18 season. So it effectively kicked in for 2018-19 (relegated clubs having a bigger pot).

The deal was a 70% increase on the deal before and coincided with the FL deal which was widely panned.

Fulham’s initial £100m spend upon promotion was in 2018/19.

 

[Mucker1884]

5 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

or, I might float the idea of no promotion and no relegation within one season. I wonder if something like that would work practically, so you’re immune from relegation, but also can’t get promoted in your first year after relegation, so it’s a different 6 clubs swapping each season. 

 

Can't believe you've been so reckless as to blurt that out on the publicly accessible worldwide webiverse!

Odds on now that EFL announce this by Xmas, to commence with immediate effect... just as we spring into second place in the table, with 2 games in hand!

?

 

[Mr. P]

Watford are due a new manager ain’t they? Is that 2 games lost now for Bilic? 

[Shipley Ram]

Bruce has been sacked, no surprise there

"A club statement said: “West Bromwich Albion have today parted company with Manager Steve Bruce. Backroom staff Steve Agnew, Stephen Clemence and Alex Bruce have also left The Hawthorns.

“The club would like to place on record its thanks to Steve Bruce and his coaching staff for their efforts since arriving in February. Under-21s coach Richard Beale will oversee first-team affairs on an interim basis, assisted by James Morrison and Gary Walsh. The process of recruiting a new Manager is now under way and an appointment will be confirmed in due course.”"

 

[NottsRam77]

Anyone else upset by boros demise ?

no ? Me neither ???

[JfR]

Anyone have Sheffield United against Blackpool down as a thriller?

United went 2-0 up
Blackpool then turned it around to go 3-2 up
Blackpool then had two men sent off in the space of 3 minutes
United won a penalty, but they missed it
In the eighth minute of injury time, United finally got an equaliser
And just when you thought it was over, a player on each side got sent off for scrapping after full time

[Ghost of Clough]

49 minutes ago, JfR said:

Anyone have Sheffield United against Blackpool down as a thriller?

United went 2-0 up
Blackpool then turned it around to go 3-2 up
Blackpool then had two men sent off in the space of 3 minutes
United won a penalty, but they missed it
In the eighth minute of injury time, United finally got an equaliser
And just when you thought it was over, a player on each side got sent off for scrapping after full time

Brewster missed a penalty in the 88th too

Edited October 15, 2022 by Ghost of Clough

[Day]

 

[TuffLuff]

 

[TigerTedd]

1 minute ago, TuffLuff said:

 

Wow, Triss saw off two Watford managers and the Queen during her short term.

[Bris Vegas]

Blackburn are showing draws are pointless at Championship level.

They’ve lost 7 already but are near the top.

Pretty sure we only lost 10 or 11 throughout the entire McClaren, Clement/Wassall seasons. 

[Ambitious]

It looks like Sky are happy to walk away from the table due to poor viewing figures in the Championship this season. A new article come out suggesting they will be showing less games and will therefore pay less money (no doubt still owning the rights to all the games). 

It’s an opportunity for the EFL to be creative with their product bringing streaming platforms to the table, (failing that) give teams the option to control their own broadcasting rights. 

Saying this, I have no doubts that they will accept a s**** deal with Sky and continue the period of austerity it has governed as it continues to eat itself.

Part of me is glad, the other is aware this will have long-term financial impact on the team I support as day-by-day we sleep walk into a situation where you simply can’t have the Premier League and EFL coexist. 

Edited October 23, 2022 by Ambitious

[RoyMac5]

32 minutes ago, Ambitious said:

It looks like Sky are happy to walk away from the table due to poor viewing figures in the Championship this season. A new article come out suggesting they will be showing less games and will therefore pay less money (no doubt still owning the rights to all the games). 

I've not read the article but does it compare viewing figures for the Prem and/or overall on Sky? Is it to do with less overall Sky viewers?