Redslo

That could be your eleventh talking point for the eleventh game.

We are certainly not in complete disagreement. I believe the following to be true: if we have a good season this year that feels like (and is) an improvement on last year, but falls short of European qualification, we will have trouble holding onto Clyne, Rodriguez, Schneiderlin, and Tadic this summer. I am skeptical that we can retain Alderweireld in any case. That means that we would have to replace important players yet again next summer to continue to move forward (or even sideways). The only way to possibly avoid this is to take a significant leap forward all at once so that we can retain the good players and add to them to do well in European competition and to requalify for the next year. This would suggest that taking a gamble to strengthen the team to accomplish that can be worth it. The problem is that there is no evidence from past events that qualifying for the Europa League will do the job. There is some evidence from Tottenham's one year in the Champions League that qualification for that league can have a knock on effect that would enable us to retain players we might otherwise lose. The problem is that I am not convinced there is any way to reliably identify a player that would make the difference between Champions League qualification and non-qualification who could ensure qualification with a high enough probability to be worth the risks that would arise from signing an expensive player whom we could not really afford unless we were playing in Europe. I am not saying such a signing would bankrupt the team--but I do think it would do damage to the sustainability goal. On the other hand, if we fail to qualify for Europe, it won't really hurt in Financial Fair Play terms--if Katharina Liebherr will cover the losses. So really (in a statement of extreme obviousness) it is up to her as to whether she wants to take the risk. Of course, nothing needs to be decided until we see where we are in January. If we win our next ten league games, we should be buying like we will be in the champions league anyway. If we lose them, not so much.

I think that is sort of what I said. However, you can never completely rule out luck in anything--it just becomes less and less likely. Was Manchester United's success due to their financial advantages and the skills of Alex Ferguson or was it luck. Given that the success lasted more than two decades, luck is very unlikely, but it can never be ruled out completely. Our five plus year run of improving results makes it quite unlikely that it is all due to luck, but it could be and it certainly could be partially due to luck.

I have read the article. Basically every thing it says is true, but I think the author's analysis is somewhat flawed and also misses the point. Certainly, a 38 game season, even a symmetrical one like the one used by the Premier League, does not guarantee that the best team always finishes first. There is always luck involved. Man City finishing first by goal difference over Man U three years ago was not proof that they were the superior team. Major League Baseball plays a 162 game season and that is not long enough to ensure that the best team has the best record. Likewise, Southampton's performance so far this year does not prove Koeman is a good manager. But for that purpose Matthew Syed is using the wrong sample. Koeman did not spring from Zeus' head last July as a fully formed BPL manager. There are years of Koeman managerial performances to analyze in determining whether he is a good manager. Presumably, that is part of what Southampton did before hiring him. As for his attempt to compare the subject to investors and the fact that random results will appear to produce a small list of investors who have out performed the market--he is correct, but that doesn't mean that no one can reliably out perform the market over the long run. http://www.bestinver.es/pdf/articulos_value/The%20Superinvestors%20of%20Graham%20and%20Doddsville%20by%20Warren%20Buffett.pdf It is unlikely we can continue to play and win like we have so far. Regression to the mean is a real thing (and one reason why firing managers looks like it works when it doesn't). There will be bad luck, including injuries, but that is part of what sport is all about. In the NFL, the teams that get to the Superbowl are almost always teams that have been relatively lucky with their injuries. That doesn't change the fact that they got to the Superbowl and one of them won it. Southampton could be a vastly improved team playing below its potential. Southampton could be an improved team playing at its potential. Southampton could be a weaker team that has been lucky. As each game gets played we have a better idea which of these possibilities is true, but we will never know for sure. However, instituting a process by which the club and its employees make good decisions as often as possible increases the likelihood of good results and it sure looks like the club has instituted that type of process.

I haven't read the article but I will try to do that. I will say that I highly recommend that you enjoy the team's success while it lasts without buying lottery tickets which are a negative expectation purchase except in very rare circumstances.

No. For FFP purposes the value of the deal would be reduced to what the authorities consider reasonable. That is part of why Man City and PSG failed FFP this past year. If it were structured as part of a Stadium naming deal, it would be much more acceptable and if it were partially contingent on European participation that would make it better too. Also, FFP is not the functional limit on our finances right now. Katharina Liebherr could put in more money each year if she wanted to. Under Premier League FFP she could put in 35 million pounds a year (really 105 million over three years) plus the costs of running the academy and the entire cost of the 40 million pound Staplewood complex. Under European FFP, she would be limited to 30 million Euros over three years. Assuming I am correctly understanding what they are saying, the Board wants the club to break even including all costs so FFP is not the current barrier to spending money at Southampton.

Couldn't you have started a new thread instead of wasting my time reading this one?

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/clubs/southampton/article4258904.ece

I think they pound repeatedly on the soft tissue to toughen it up.

I don't think our luck is that bad. If anything, we might finish 5th but Man City gets thrown out of the Champions League for Financial Fair Play violations and we get in.

A couple of articles in the Times about this both by Alyson Rudd. I can only provide a link to one of them because I do not have web access to my ipad times subscription. http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/clubs/southampton/article4258904.ece

I have not analyzed the numbers, but I do oppose throwing caution to the wind in general when I believe Southampton's recruitment department is capable of identifying players who will strengthen the team without doing that. I am also a Moneyball type of person and I believe that we should try to take advantage of clubs that need to sell in January rather than be the club that is taken advantage of because it looks like we need (or really, really want) to buy in January. As for your specific player suggestions: Klose is pretty old so unless he were quite cheap including salary, it would be a mistake to sign him. If he were cheap enough he would be good back up for Pelle for the rest of the season. André-Pierre Gignac's team is having their own great year--I doubt they would want to sell him, but he is out of contract this summer. I suspect his transfer fee would normally exceed 20 million pounds, but maybe not how. If he were cheap enough so that his transfer fee plus salary is consistent with the sustainability targets that the board has talked about, it might be worth taking a shot. But he will be 29 in January and likely want a long enough contract that the club would be assuming significant risks. He would certainly be a good addition based upon what I can tell, but I am not an expert at judging talent. Klaas-Jan Huntelaar's contract expires this summer so he might be available pretty cheaply, but he is 31 already and it is risky to sign and rely upon any player of that age. Luiz Adriano is unlikely to get a work permit given his lack of international playing time. He is out of contract this summer so he would probably be cheap enough to afford. Shaqiri is exactly the type of player we should be trying for but his contract lasts until 2016 so he will not be cheap and I really don't think he would want to move here from Bayern Munich. He might end up being like Gaston Rameriz or Osvaldo where we have to way overpay (especially in salary terms) to sign a player who would not want to come here except for the money. Marco Reus is currently being chased by teams who can afford to pay him far more than we can. Also, I don't think we need to improve our quality to compete. I think we need to improve our depth. Good young players who will be happy to fill in as needed while they develop can do this job better, and less expensively than big name signings. And they are less likely to be disruptive influences on the team.

Here is a link to an article that purports to explain it. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/champions-league/10076205/England-could-be-awarded-five-spots-in-the-Champions-League-from-2015.html Basically, if an English team wins the Europa League or the Champions League while finishing out of the top four, England gets five qualifiers. However, if an English team wins both the Champions League and Europa cup and both of those teams finish outside the top four, then England still only gets five entrants and the fourth place team does not qualify.

I wouldn't be too sure. They need to improve their European coefficient so they get a better draw next year. They can't afford to blow off any games after this very poor group phase.

Thank for that excellent report.

I don't understand what you mean by this.

Possibly, but I doubt Portsmouth is even on his radar given his Canadian background and all.

The problem is that of the self-fulfilling prophecy. If players and managers think that Southampton cannot be a top European club, they will be right because they will all be keen to move up rather than stay here. I suppose that is why this season takes on special importance. If we can continue playing well and qualify for Europe we can retain players and progress. If we finish 8th again, some of our better players will want to leave and we will not be able to stop all of them from doing so. Plus, if Shaw, Lallana, Lambert, and Lovren continue to underperform, we may not be able to get as much money next summer as we did last for our want away players.

I know this is my American perspective coming through--because any NFL, NBA, NHL, or MLB team can, with proper management, win everything--but when I read something like this I always think "Why can't Southampton be the top European club he manages?"

I don't think he was predicting so much as saying what was needed to target 5th or 6th place for the season--9 points out of a tough ten games with all the points coming from the easier games. That being said, I think he is wrong and we would need 15 points out of those ten games to reach 5th place and, frankly, right now I am hoping for more.

No, but he may have done so with six months of insufficient game time.

Assuming you mean a favorable impact, I can suggest Suarez and Cisse and Jermain Defoe--but your point is valid. After all, in the past few years there was Darren Bent, Fernando Torres, and Andy Carroll. All of whom had a negative impact on their teams--at least with respect to the waste of money. January is a time to take advantage of teams with financial troubles or facing relegation by buying their good young prospects cheap, not a time to strengthen the first team by overpaying for someone that a good team does not want.

Don't worry, I only do appeals. You would have to be convicted to get me as your lawyer. So then I would be arguing that your trial attorney erred by not bring in your Grand Theft Auto claim.

Well, it is better than saying that I did this in FM so Southampton should be able to do it in real life. That being said, what is really crazy is that the progress we have made in the real world mirrors what I do in FM which I always assumed was unrealistic. But spending just one year in the Championship. Going from relegation battle to top half finish to contending for Europe in three years. That is what happens in FM. We should all hope that the pattern continues since my Southampton saves always dominate the Champions League by the end of this decade. Absent the fact that being racist is worse than taking FM too seriously and the specific names, that is exactly what I am saying. I am the arbiter of American taste in English football teams.

But he is getting to play at a top level team and in the Champions League and undoubtedly learning a lot. He certainly has, because of injuries, played more at Arsenal than he would have here. Chambers is the one outward transfer who undoubtedly does not regret his move.