[Albion] Potterball, your opinions so far?

[Thunder Bolt]

For a good while, Bruno got stick because he is not Calde

Sorry but I disagree. Calde was loved but nobody said he was better than Bruno. Ok maybe an odd one or two, but you always get that on Nsc.

 

[Icy Gull]

Sorry but I disagree. Calde was loved but nobody said he was better than Bruno. Ok maybe an odd one or two, but you always get that on Nsc.

Bruno came in for quite a bit of flak as a liability, wresting players in the box and being responsible for goals conceded when Hyppia was manager (I think?). I remember quite a few comments on here that he was past it and especially when he was played in midfield for a game or two.

We were at the wrong end of the Championship at the time

 

[Stat Brother]

Bruno came in for quite a bit of flak as a liability, wresting players in the box and being responsible for goals conceded when Hyppia was manager (I think?). I remember quite a few comments on here that he was past it and especially when he was played in midfield for a game or two.

We were at the wrong end of the Championship at the time

Deffo.

I remember him then in Davy Propper's position now.

Just a little to lackadaisical for some 'supporters' to get to grips with.

 

[casbom]

This is interesting for those into Stats: https://statsbomb.com/2019/12/are-brighton-improving-under-graham-potter/

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

This is interesting for those into Stats: https://statsbomb.com/2019/12/are-brighton-improving-under-graham-potter/

It is a very interesting piece -

It also stated that the club bought players that were not suited to Hughton's approach - so much for CH having a say over transfers. If you buy players that don't do what the manager needs to do then you really need to ask what is going on - and why Brighton didn't sack Hughton after the first season instead of depriving him of the players he needed to build his squad last season resulting in the scramble against relegation.

 

[Icy Gull]

It is a very interesting piece -

It also stated that the club bought players that were not suited to Hughton's approach - so much for CH having a say over transfers. If you buy players that don't do what the manager needs to do then you really need to ask what is going on - and why Brighton didn't sack Hughton after the first season instead of depriving him of the players he needed to build his squad last season resulting in the scramble against relegation.

Yep, we are clearly a complete shambles of a club with no direction. We can’t defend or score either...doomed.

 

[perseus]

My initial instinct was Ryan. Do goal kicks count as passes I wonder?

Yep. keepers usually kick it long and have about 43% passing rate. Cue: a long punt to Locadia.

 

[Icy Gull]

Yep. keepers usually kick it long and have about 43% passing rate. Cue: a long punt to Locadia.

Maty may have a big kick but that’s ridiculous, it won’t reach him and we can boo Locadia for not making the effort to get to it

 

[Turkey]

It is a very interesting piece -

It also stated that the club bought players that were not suited to Hughton's approach - so much for CH having a say over transfers. If you buy players that don't do what the manager needs to do then you really need to ask what is going on - and why Brighton didn't sack Hughton after the first season instead of depriving him of the players he needed to build his squad last season resulting in the scramble against relegation.

The only huge sum we spent was on Jahanbakhsh and he's had less opportunity under Potter than Hughton, so not sure I'd agree with that opinion.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

Yep, we are clearly a complete shambles of a club with no direction. We can’t defend or score either...doomed.

If the club's hierarchy were intent buying players based on changing the style of play without considering the outlook of manager then they really should have talked to CH at the end of 2017-18 - and if agreement wasn't likely then they should have parted ways. Instead the approach seems to have been - we can't sack him after one season in the PL - lets give him players that he can't use, hope to survive and then dump him. It would have far more respectful to have parted company a year earlier when his reputation wasn't tainted by the football he was forced to play because of the squad available - and made ham available for jobs at Everton, West Ham, Southampton, Aston Villa, etc. In fact - given that they bought players that didn't suit what Hughton was doing - his success at keeping the club in the PL is even more remarkable.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

It is a very interesting piece -

It also stated that the club bought players that were not suited to Hughton's approach - so much for CH having a say over transfers. If you buy players that don't do what the manager needs to do then you really need to ask what is going on - and why Brighton didn't sack Hughton after the first season instead of depriving him of the players he needed to build his squad last season resulting in the scramble against relegation.

I would argue that is a false inference. My inference was that CH was party to bringing in all players (this has been published), and none were signed without his agreement (this has also been published), meaning that it seems likely he did not realise at the time that some that he signed may not fit his system(s). He did have more than one system, too, you realise?

There is no conspiracy to see here.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

If the club's hierarchy were intent buying players based on changing the style of play without considering the outlook of manager then they really should have talked to CH at the end of 2017-18 - and if agreement wasn't likely then they should have parted ways. Instead the approach seems to have been - we can't sack him after one season in the PL - lets give him players that he can't use, hope to survive and then dump him. It would have far more respectful to have parted company a year earlier when his reputation wasn't tainted by the football he was forced to play because of the squad available - and made ham available for jobs at Everton, West Ham, Southampton, Aston Villa, etc. In fact - given that they bought players that didn't suit what Hughton was doing - his success at keeping the club in the PL is even more remarkable.

You are a great expert at finding hindsight solutions to problems that never actually existed.

Tell me, what should Douglas Home's government of 1967 actually have done to avoid that terrible mistake we made, wading into the Vietnam War along side the US?

 

[schmunk]

Re Montoya and pace.

The way I see it, if the 20 first choice premier league right backs had a foot race over 20, 50 or 100 metres, Montoya would finish in the top half. I just think because he's not as good positionally as most of them and doesn't always anticipate as well as he should, you quite often see him 5 yards behind some nippy winger. That's why people think he looks slow.

FIFA 20 reckons he's joint 8th fastest (ignoring duplicate entries from the same club - "first choice", as you say)

https://www.futbin.com/players?page...,RWB&version=gold&sort=Player_Pace&order=desc

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

The only huge sum we spent was on Jahanbakhsh and he's had less opportunity under Potter than Hughton, so not sure I'd agree with that opinion.

Bissouma was something like £17million - but that is not really the issue - the club spent over £50million the previous summer - what if it had been spent on players that Hughton could have and would have used. How much better would the team have been in that situation?

 

[Icy Gull]

If the club's hierarchy were intent buying players based on changing the style of play without considering the outlook of manager then they really should have talked to CH at the end of 2017-18 - and if agreement wasn't likely then they should have parted ways. Instead the approach seems to have been - we can't sack him after one season in the PL - lets give him players that he can't use, hope to survive and then dump him. It would have far more respectful to have parted company a year earlier when his reputation wasn't tainted by the football he was forced to play because of the squad available - and made ham available for jobs at Everton, West Ham, Southampton, Aston Villa, etc. In fact - given that they bought players that didn't suit what Hughton was doing - his success at keeping the club in the PL is even more remarkable.

I think you may be rowing this “not rating the hierarchy at the Albion” boat pretty much alone

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

I would argue that is a false inference. My inference was that CH was party to bringing in all players (this has been published), and none were signed without his agreement (this has also been published), meaning that it seems likely he did not realise at the time that some that he signed may not fit his system(s). He did have more than one system, too, you realise?

There is no conspiracy to see here.

You are a great expert at finding hindsight solutions to problems that never actually existed.

Wasn't me who found this - wish I had - when the club sacked Hughton they claimed it was because of the 3 wins in 23 games - now there are several sources which indicate that the club intended to remove him all along as part of a strategy to change the direction of the club. I don't have a problem with that - the club's hierarchy are entitled to do whatever they want with the club - they own it. I do think that they have done a bit of a disservice to CH and to the fans in the approach last season - it makes the kool aid taste a bit sour.

I will refer back to the article that was linked by [MENTION=7321]casbom[/MENTION] -
Others at the club, meanwhile, felt it time to evolve to a more progressive approach, and players were recruited to fit a slightly different philosophy. What happened was likely inevitable. Hughton stuck to his football with his players, while huge sums of money were spent on footballers who didn’t fit what he wanted to do. As such, many of the signings just didn’t work out, and Brighton ended up around where they were the previous year.

 

[Jolly Red Giant]

I think you may be rowing this “not rating the hierarchy at the Albion” boat pretty much alone

Please indicate where I stated the above -

 

[Icy Gull]

Wasn't me who found this - wish I had - when the club sacked Hughton they claimed it was because of the 3 wins in 23 games - now there are several sources which indicate that the club intended to remove him all along as part of a strategy to change the direction of the club. I don't have a problem with that - the club's hierarchy are entitled to do whatever they want with the club - they own it. I do think that they have done a bit of a disservice to CH and to the fans in the approach last season - it makes the kool aid taste a bit sour.

I will refer back to the article that was linked by [MENTION=7321]casbom[/MENTION] -
Others at the club, meanwhile, felt it time to evolve to a more progressive approach, and players were recruited to fit a slightly different philosophy. What happened was likely inevitable. Hughton stuck to his football with his players, while huge sums of money were spent on footballers who didn’t fit what he wanted to do. As such, many of the signings just didn’t work out, and Brighton ended up around where they were the previous year.

Are these the same sources who suggested the club were racist in sacking CH?

 

[perseus]

The Potterball seen so far is pretty light compared to what we will see later on. Several of the potterball traits seen in Östersund and even Swansea (where he had a, compared to Brighton, younger squad that was easier to transform) are not yet present in Brighton. Some of the potterball traits may be very difficult to perform in the PL, but there is definitely more to come.

The current Brighton squad is one of the worst in the PL from a Potterball perspective. There is no midfielder, except maybe Alzate, who performs penetrating runs. The wingers and wing backs are slow. The strikers are decent but incapable of doing any type of target man tasks.

The Brighton way of Potterball as it is now is pretty far from what it will be in the long run.

Sounds like good news.

Does Potter favour a midfielder who can pass the ball accurately or a ball artist like Zaha? I could argue that best to have an anchor man, powerhouse and architect in midfield, and a speed merchant with tricks on the wing. Penetrating runs can be made by the powerhouse or the second striker coming deep. Penetrating passes (the architect) are quicker than penetrating runs. Nice to have a midfielder who is comfortable on the ball and doesn't lose possession though.

Not exclusive to Potterball.

 

[Icy Gull]

Please indicate where I stated the above -

So do you rate them or don’t you? You don’t appear to have a good word to say about them which leads me to thinking you don’t rate them.