Soccernomics - Why Clough has been a success

[LittleRedRam]

Soccernomics - Why Clough has been a success

The thrust of the 'Open Letter to Tom Glick' posted on another site but referenced in the "This Puts Everything perfectly" thread on this site is essentially to pin most of the blame for Derby's current malaise on Nigel Clough whilst also going on to admonish the board for not adequately supporting Clough with the required level of investment.

Actually though, by any objective asssesment, Clough has been a success.

This probably sounds like a highly controversial claim but the most comprehensive analysis of what factors determine success in English Football, "Soccernomics (or "Why England Lose" in the UK) by Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski concluded that salaries was were by far the most significant factor.

“We studied the spending of forty English clubs between 1978 and 1997 ... their spending on salaries explained a massive 92 percent of that variation. In the 1998-2007 period, spending on salaries by clubs in the Premier League and the Championship… still explained 89 percent of the variation in league position."

In fact, ironically, according to the authors, the only manager in the history of English Football in the period they research who significant over-peformed in relation to the wage bill of the club they were managing was none other than Brian Clough at Forest. More evidence to suggest that Nigel's dad was actually the greatest manager in the history of the English game but that's beside the point here.

Given that (Nigel) Clough has slashed the wage bill by more than a third, from £15 million to £9 million (and these figures are prior to the sale of Kris Commons) and has nevertheless still managed to (slightly) improve Derby's league position over the last year he has actually been successful because he has achieved the same (or in fact slightly better) results with far fewer resources. A strong case can be made that it is actually quite remarkable that we weren't relegated last season or the season before or are not in the relegation zone now. Derby were in a downward spiral when Clough took over from Paul Jewell and we could have easily dropped down to League One just like Man City, Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Forest and Southampton have previosuly done. Clough managed to stop the slide and has since made incremental progress towards reversing the downards trajectory as evidenced by our much improved performances and league position in the first half of the season despite having a massive budget cut.

However recent results have been disasterous and as a season ticket holder I am just as concerned with the current situation that the club is in as the poster of the 'Open Letter'. Nevertheless I feel strongly that it is important to distinguish between causes and symptoms. Yes, Clough has made some mistakes (name me a manager that doesn't) and yes not all Clough's signings have been unqualified successes but the underlying cause is the level of finance available to attract players of the right quality. If budget constraints dictate that we have to make do with signing loan players not considered good enough for a first team place by rival championship clubs or permanent signings from the likes of Ilkeston Town and Burton Albion then it is unrealistic to expect these players to set the Championship alight.

Clough himself has effectively said that he's seriously constrained by the budget he's operating with.

"I did not know it would be quite so severe as it has been but I knew it would be hard. The owners have put a lot of money into this club and at the moment have seen no return for it. This is the way they want to go forward and we have to work within that. When they came in – before we arrived – perhaps they had bigger ambitions."

and in the same article

"It is extremely difficult to rebuild the team in those circumstances," Clough says. "While other teams are buying established Championship players, we are having to pick ones who haven't quite proved themselves."

(See http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/nigel-clough-thickskinned-brutally-honest-who-does-he-take-after-2179645.html#)

When results are bad, most fans will tend to blame the manager but I really think we need to look at root causes rather than the symptoms. Does anybody really think any other manager could do significantly better with the very limited resources that Clough has at his disposal? And before anybody mentions Ian Holloway and Blackpool, they are the football equivalent of the proverbial grandad who smoked all his life and lived until he was 94. They are the exception, not the rule and it does not alter the fact that in general the most reliable way to suceed is to attract better players and that means making the necessary finance available, as demonstrated by the Soccernomics research

It's now almost six months since Rob Hulse was sold and there's no evidence to suggest that he's going to be adequately replaced. In the meantime, we are left in the pitiful position of desparately clinging to the hope that Leicester will release one of their reserve players to us on loan or that we might sign Shefti Kuqi, a player who admittedly did very well for us but who is after all in the twilight of his career and has been deemed surplus to requirements by fellow Championship club Swansea City, a much smaller club than Derby in every respect.

As supporters of a club of Derby's stature, we should not be accepting this state of affairs and we should not allow Nigel Clough to become the scapegoat for the board's failure to provide the level of investment necessary to compete effectively in the championship.

We should be pointing the (preferably giant foam) finger where the blame actually lies, and that's with the board.

[Duracell]

Soccernomics - Why Clough has been a success

The thrust of the 'Open Letter to Tom Glick' posted on another site but referenced in the "This Puts Everything perfectly" thread on this site is essentially to pin most of the blame for Derby's current malaise on Nigel Clough whilst also going on to admonish the board for not adequately supporting Clough with the required level of investment.

Actually though, by any objective asssesment, Clough has been a success.

This probably sounds like a highly controversial claim but the most comprehensive analysis of what factors determine success in English Football, "Soccernomics (or "Why England Lose" in the UK) by Simon Kuper and Stefan Szymanski concluded that salaries was were by far the most significant factor.

“We studied the spending of forty English clubs between 1978 and 1997 ... their spending on salaries explained a massive 92 percent of that variation. In the 1998-2007 period, spending on salaries by clubs in the Premier League and the Championship… still explained 89 percent of the variation in league position."

In fact, ironically, according to the authors, the only manager in the history of English Football in the period they research who significant over-peformed in relation to the wage bill of the club they were managing was none other than Brian Clough at Forest. More evidence to suggest that Nigel's dad was actually the greatest manager in the history of the English game but that's beside the point here.

Given that (Nigel) Clough has slashed the wage bill by more than a third, from £15 million to £9 million (and these figures are prior to the sale of Kris Commons) and has nevertheless still managed to (slightly) improve Derby's league position over the last year he has actually been successful because he has achieved the same (or in fact slightly better) results with far fewer resources. A strong case can be made that it is actually quite remarkable that we weren't relegated last season or the season before or are not in the relegation zone now. Derby were in a downward spiral when Clough took over from Paul Jewell and we could have easily dropped down to League One just like Man City, Leeds, Sheffield Wednesday, Forest and Southampton have previosuly done. Clough managed to stop the slide and has since made incremental progress towards reversing the downards trajectory as evidenced by our much improved performances and league position in the first half of the season despite having a massive budget cut.

However recent results have been disasterous and as a season ticket holder I am just as concerned with the current situation that the club is in as the poster of the 'Open Letter'. Nevertheless I feel strongly that it is important to distinguish between causes and symptoms. Yes, Clough has made some mistakes (name me a manager that doesn't) and yes not all Clough's signings have been unqualified successes but the underlying cause is the level of finance available to attract players of the right quality. If budget constraints dictate that we have to make do with signing loan players not considered good enough for a first team place by rival championship clubs or permanent signings from the likes of Ilkeston Town and Burton Albion then it is unrealistic to expect these players to set the Championship alight.

Clough himself has effectively said that he's seriously constrained by the budget he's operating with.

"I did not know it would be quite so severe as it has been but I knew it would be hard. The owners have put a lot of money into this club and at the moment have seen no return for it. This is the way they want to go forward and we have to work within that. When they came in – before we arrived – perhaps they had bigger ambitions."

and in the same article

"It is extremely difficult to rebuild the team in those circumstances," Clough says. "While other teams are buying established Championship players, we are having to pick ones who haven't quite proved themselves."

(See http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/nigel-clough-thickskinned-brutally-honest-who-does-he-take-after-2179645.html#)

When results are bad, most fans will tend to blame the manager but I really think we need to look at root causes rather than the symptoms. Does anybody really think any other manager could do significantly better with the very limited resources that Clough has at his disposal? And before anybody mentions Ian Holloway and Blackpool, they are the football equivalent of the proverbial grandad who smoked all his life and lived until he was 94. They are the exception, not the rule and it does not alter the fact that in general the most reliable way to suceed is to attract better players and that means making the necessary finance available, as demonstrated by the Soccernomics research

It's now almost six months since Rob Hulse was sold and there's no evidence to suggest that he's going to be adequately replaced. In the meantime, we are left in the pitiful position of desparately clinging to the hope that Leicester will release one of their reserve players to us on loan or that we might sign Shefti Kuqi, a player who admittedly did very well for us but who is after all in the twilight of his career and has been deemed surplus to requirements by fellow Championship club Swansea City, a much smaller club than Derby in every respect.

As supporters of a club of Derby's stature, we should not be accepting this state of affairs and we should not allow Nigel Clough to become the scapegoat for the board's failure to provide the level of investment necessary to compete effectively in the championship.

We should be pointing the (preferably giant foam) finger where the blame actually lies, and that's with the board.

How terrible, backing up your opinion with facts

It's an excellent post but I know for a fact some posters on here will ignore it completely and will just post their opinion with nowhere near this kind of depth.

[Bris Vegas]

Whilst I enjoyed reading that, I fear this thread is just going to follow on from all the others.. Board out, Cough out etc..

Whilst I fully acknowledge that Clough has slashed the wage bill by a third to $9mill from $16mil whilst achieving midtable this isn't that great of an achievement IMO..

With a $16mill a year wagebill you'd expect to have a team of Forests calibre, or of Cardiffs calibre.. In fact it wasn't, he inherited a team that was of Ssausagehorpes standard, a team that could have been relegated and rightly so.. It was so bad ability wise for what it was being paid.

NC has effectively done what any other manager in world football would do. Get shot of the god awful players we have and bring in his own players. No one can deny that he's not had the licence to bring in his own players.. He's made around 15 transfers off the top of my head.. Some of his signings have been value for money, others not..

If we had brought in Steve Coppell we could be in the playoffs by now with a much better squad, however on the flip side if we had brought in Darren Ferguson or Paul Ince we could be in League 1 by now..

We really was a special case, and still are IMO, thus it's unfair to get rid of NC now as he's only halfway through his work.. You mayaswell let him try and finish the job he came here to do.

[MrsRam]

Good post.

[Bris Vegas]

Double Post Appologies

[smiffy]

Don't care about finance , just success on the field.

You do NOT get it by being frugal all the time, you have to have experience and skill in the team, and it costs.

Keep aiming low and you stay low, aim high and maybe, but no guarantees you go higher.

We are firing blanks IMHO

[Ambitious]

The same coppell who spent well in the summer, brought in some high earners and spent big bucks.. Left after 2 months and left bristol in dismay which has took them half a season to shake off?

Nah, im sure we would be in the play offs under his leadership! :confused:

[Bris Vegas]

The same coppell who spent well in the summer, brought in some high earners and spent big bucks.. Left after 2 months and left bristol in dismay which has took them half a season to shake off?

Nah, im sure we would be in the play offs under his leadership! :confused:

Aside from David James who are the other players? And he left after 2 games, for reasons unknown.. Theres no knowing where they'd be if he'd stayed..

But his track record speaks for itself.. He assembled a Reading squad capable of breaking records for under $1.5mill.

He was just an example.. Like I said he could have done worse than Clough, and infact Paul Ince could of done better.. Who knows.

[Duracell]

Don't care about finance , just success on the field.

You do NOT get it by being frugal all the time, you have to have experience and skill in the team, and it costs.

Keep aiming low and you stay low, aim high and maybe, but no guarantees you go higher.

We are firing blanks IMHO

Are you attacking Nigel, or the board?

The whole point of this guy's post is that given his financial constraints Nigel has done a fantastic job on field.

[Dangerous]

Are you attacking Nigel, or the board?

The whole point of this guy's post is that given his financial constraints Nigel has done a fantastic job on field.

i cant be doing with these marathon posts,but I cant agree he has done a fantastic job on field.

[Bris Vegas]

Are you attacking Nigel, or the board?

The whole point of this guy's post is that given his financial constraints Nigel has done a fantastic job on field.

I hope you said that as your opinion and not fact..

As I follow on from Dangerous's comment, can't agree with that..

And Dangerous, the point of the marathon posts is that you can explain your point without having to write an obscene amount of posts.. I have roughly 150 posts in 2 years.. If I was to write short, petty answers to make my point I'd be looking at 2,000 posts or more.

[Duracell]

i cant be doing with these marathon posts,but I cant agree he has done a fantastic job on field.

So you haven't read the original post which explains why?

[smiffy]

Are you attacking Nigel, or the board?

The whole point of this guy's post is that given his financial constraints Nigel has done a fantastic job on field.

It has yet to be proven whether Clough has had the chance to spend more, but has declined, so it could be his fault, it could be the Boards fault, or it could be both, which ever way it is not good enough.

[Duracell]

I hope you said that as your opinion and not fact..

As I follow on from Dangerous's comment, can't agree with that..

And Dangerous, the point of the marathon posts is that you can explain your point without having to write an obscene amount of posts.. I have roughly 150 posts in 2 years.. If I was to write short, petty answers to make my point I'd be looking at 2,000 posts or more.

Not at all, that's his opinion. But many posters have done exactly what I said they would in my original reply.

They ignore his post, and state their own opinion with no meaningful counter argument.

[Duracell]

It has yet to be proven whether Clough has had the chance to spend more, but has declined, so it could be his fault, it could be the Boards fault, or it could be both, which ever way it is not good enough.

Well even if he has refused extra funds, then he the original post has said that he has performed well on-field with the financial constraints.

Come on smiffy, you normally have all the answers, what's up with you this evening!?

[smiffy]

Well even if he has refused extra funds, then he the original post has said that he has performed well on-field with the financial constraints.

Come on smiffy, you normally have all the answers, what's up with you this evening!?

He has not IMO performed well.

If he could have spent more and maybe bought better, but declined and instead backed his judgement to buy cheaper, but IMO has failed, then he has not performed well, merely been pigheaded.

[Duracell]

He has not IMO performed well.

If he could have spent more and maybe bought better, but declined and instead backed his judgement to buy cheaper, but IMO has failed, then he has not performed well, merely been pigheaded.

This thread was about "soccernomics" though and I think the original poster wanted a discussion based around that, not everybody's assessment of Clough's performance as manager....again.

[smiffy]

This thread was about "soccernomics" though and I think the original poster wanted a discussion based around that, not everybody's assessment of Clough's performance as manager....again.

Fair due`s, no one was more critical on the Nep about having 10 threads about the same topic going at the same time.

[peakram]

Pound for pound and in maybe even more taxing circumstances, I think George Burley was probably a step or two ahead of Nigel is currently, getting quite a few decent finds no one else thought of at the time.

I know some of his finds were maybe down to the scouting network George had at the time but I was very sorry to see him go, the football was good and he was doing a great job in very tough circumstances, having just reached the playoffs with no money to play with at all.

Not sure Clough will be capable of unearthing much more than a journeyman type of player in the long run, OK Bueno has some nice touches but always looked a little on the light side and can disappear from games for long periods.

He has also let the striking department become very threadbare, and the club have resorted to calling players strikers who simply aren't fit for that name.

[Ambitious]

He has not IMO performed well.

If he could have spent more and maybe bought better, but declined and instead backed his judgement to buy cheaper, but IMO has failed, then he has not performed well, merely been pigheaded.

You honestly believe Clough has turned down money? You genuinely believe in your own heart that he wanted to carry on this season with only 2 options upfront, both are injury prone?

I think if he had money he would of spent it and for me the money he has spent, he has spent well.

I don't think you can ask a 400k signing to come into the club and be a top 6 player, otherwise you would have to pay more than 400k in the first place. It's easy to say well bla bla signed him for 50k but how many of them players come along? honestly, people look to kightly and doyle as two bargin signings.. one was signed in 2006 another in 2005. The massively ironic thing is if we made a signing for the lower irish divisions and another from the conference then the knifes would well and truly be out, so I don't think people actually know what they want and in the end everyone ends up moaning. I remember people crying out for Lee Croft and everyone was happy when we signed him, expected big things from him and it hasn't worked out at all and now everyone says they wouldn't of signed him because his fat and ****..etc which is just complete ********, that's what really irritates me about people on this board.. it's the same people over and over again, if we had signed Austin for 1.8million people would be moaning about the money and if he didn't do well then people would be absolutely hammering clough and the board for wasting money.

Imagine if we signed Ched Evans for 3million, 12 goals in 58 games for Sheff Utd.. effectively a worse record than Chris Porter, he would get hammered every time he touched the ball.