[Football] If Palace can't play in the Europa League

AstroSloth · Tuesday at 2:09 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
The discussion is about their last season, and whether it was a superb season.
I think they have a very good first 11, better than what we've been putting out and you seem to agree.

If Kadioglu proves to be a better right back than Munoz, then I will be over the moon.
But that's a debate for next season.

But their first XI isn't stronger, I'd take ours any day, we've never even seen our strongest XI line up.

If you're saying how many players get into each side then that's a different argument, however the step down between their better players and our weaker players is less than the difference between our stronger players and their weaker players.

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 2:11 PM

Brian Munich said:
We spent 200m this season but our net spend over the last 3-4 seasons - during which time the bulk of the respective squads has been built - is far less than Palace’s.

Besides, for that 200m we’ve got a fairly deep squad, so despite the worst injury record in the league we were still able to finish comfortably ahead of them.

No argument with any of that.

I'm not debating who has the best squad, or is better run, or whose PSR position is better.
Suspect we're going to win those debates for many years to come

Brian Munich · Tuesday at 2:13 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
No argument with any of that.

I'm not debating who has the best squad, or is better run, or whose PSR position is better.
Suspect we're going to win those debates for many years to come

You brought it up. Our current squad strength relative to our net spend over the last few seasons is most definitely impressive.

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 2:22 PM

AstroSloth said:
But their first XI isn't stronger, I'd take ours any day, we've never even seen our strongest XI line up.

If you're saying how many players get into each side then that's a different argument, however the step down between their better players and our weaker players is less than the difference between our stronger players and their weaker players.

I would argue that gap has lessened significantly in the last season.
Glasner has done a similar job on the "lesser" players that De Zerbi did on ours.

In a best 11, there isn't a single Brighton fan that would consider, Richards, Lacroix, Hughes, Kamada, Sarr, Mitchell or Nketiah.
But equally I suspect they wouldn't consider, Webster, Veltman, Estupinan, Minteh, Ayari, Weiffer, Hinshelwood.

Our depth is the big differentiator.
It's why we've managed to improve our league standing from last season.

Harry Wilson's tackle · Tuesday at 2:24 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
I would argue that gap has lessened significantly in the last season.
Glasner has done a similar job on the "lesser" players that De Zerbi did on ours.

In a best 11, there isn't a single Brighton fan that would consider, Richards, Lacroix, Hughes, Kamada, Sarr, Mitchell or Nketiah.
But equally I suspect they wouldn't consider, Webster, Veltman, Estupinan, Minteh, Ayari, Weiffer, Hinshelwood.

Our depth is the big differentiator.
It's why we've managed to improve our league standing from last season.

Sarr and Richards are decent.

Stato · Tuesday at 2:41 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
Yeah all things considered our achievement is pretty good, but we did also spend £200m to help us in all the areas we have been able to overcome this season. So I wouldn't say it's "impressive" as such.

The Jury is still out on Huerzeler, i would suggest. He has done well - without setting the world alight.
Glasner has proven himself this season and should be well set to get Parish to support him, next season.

Our optimism is justified because of our ownership and the depth of squad we have built up.
Their optimism is based on their current top performers and head coach.

Agreed our optimism has better foundations, but right now, their immediate future looks quite bright.

My jury's not out on Hurzeler. He's grown as the season has progressed. The £200m is a red herring. The net figure is massively skewed by us making a huge profit in the previous windows and investing most of the income this summer.

If you assume that Baleba was brought in last season to replace Mac Allister, then this year Rutter replaced (not directly) Undav, Wieffer: Dahoud, the failed replacement for Caicedo, Gruda: Gross, O'Riley: Gilmour, Kadioglu: Barco, Gomez: Moder, Minteh the injured March (who was being valued at €22m when he got injured). Osman, Tsimas and Yalcouye have been sent out on loan and Cashin's played about ten minutes. However, if you count Cashin in the playing resources available, that's €263.45m of players in, but approx. €196.35m of players out the door or unavailable.

In his first season in any top flight, Hurzeler has had to cope with this squad churn and a horrendous injury list whilst learning the league. His achievement is under the radar, but fairly remarkable, possibly underrated because he's at a club from which the media just expects this kind of unprecedented progress. It's hard to find stats on manager's debut seasons in any European top flight. Most lists tell you only about first seasons in the EPL, but I'm struggling to think of any manager in recent years who has joined a club from outside the monied six (rather than taken up a promoted team) with no previous experience of managing in the top flight of a decent European league and managed them to a higher finish in his first season. If you include the big six, Maresca finished higher, but he added significantly less points to Chelsea's 2023/24 total than FH did to Brighton's.

Berty23 · Tuesday at 2:42 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
You're missing out the 3 cup wins - we didn't have.
Oh and the two games they beat us in.

Got me now?

They beat one more premier league side in the cup than we did and that was a VAR job!

Judging a team based solely on head to head would be very strange. We have a winning record against Liverpool over the last few years don’t we? Are we better than them?

The injury numbers are quite something

Granted Wharton only started 16 league games. Of which palace managed to win 4 but other than that.

Eze started 31 played 34
Sarr played all 38. Started 30.
Henderson started all 38
Munoz missed one all season. 37 starts.
Mitchell missed one. 37 starts
Guihi missed 4. 34 starts.
Lacroix signed after 3 games played. Played all 35.
Mateta. Played 37. Started 35.

So basically they did not get injuries for the first team (I have not checked but I assume some suspensions in there missed games)

Whereas we had

Bart with 36 matches
JPVH started 33 played 34
Pervis started 26 and played 29
Dunk started 23 played 25 (granted never fit so arguably lost his spot to Webster)
Veltman started 19. Played 21
Mitoma only started 28. Played in 36 (carrying injury)
Rutter started 19 played 28
Baleba started 31 played in 34
Hinshelwood started 22 played 26
Pedro started only 23. Played 27
Welbz started 24. Played 30.

We finished 8 ahead of them despite them have hardly any injuries. Mad to argue their first team is stronger imo. But that’s up to you.

Stato · Tuesday at 2:48 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
You're missing out the 3 cup wins - we didn't have.

Luck of the draw. They beat sixth and third and got a trophy. We beat fourth and fifth and got a quarter final against seventh.

Seasider78 · Tuesday at 3:04 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
I would argue that gap has lessened significantly in the last season.
Glasner has done a similar job on the "lesser" players that De Zerbi did on ours.

In a best 11, there isn't a single Brighton fan that would consider, Richards, Lacroix, Hughes, Kamada, Sarr, Mitchell or Nketiah.
But equally I suspect they wouldn't consider, Webster, Veltman, Estupinan, Minteh, Ayari, Weiffer, Hinshelwood.

Our depth is the big differentiator.
It's why we've managed to improve our league standing from last season.

Depth will be their downfall next season as it was ours on our European adventure and every other of the clubs who can’t afford to have £60-70m back ups on the bench. Like us it won’t impact the experience and joy of their club playing in Europe but it will certainly hit their progress in the league.

Berty23 · Tuesday at 3:07 PM

Seasider78 said:
Depth will be their downfall next season as it was ours on our European adventure and every other of the clubs who can’t afford to have £60-70m back ups on the bench. Like us it won’t impact the experience and joy of their club playing in Europe but it will certainly hit their progress in the league.

I hope it doesn’t. Their progress on last season was to get worse. I am hopeful that will continue!

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 3:17 PM

Berty23 said:
They beat one more premier league side in the cup than we did and that was a VAR job!

Judging a team based solely on head to head would be very strange. We have a winning record against Liverpool over the last few years don’t we? Are we better than them?

The injury numbers are quite something

Granted Wharton only started 16 league games. Of which palace managed to win 4 but other than that.

Eze started 31 played 34
Sarr played all 38. Started 30.
Henderson started all 38
Munoz missed one all season. 37 starts.
Mitchell missed one. 37 starts
Guihi missed 4. 34 starts.
Lacroix signed after 3 games played. Played all 35.
Mateta. Played 37. Started 35.

So basically they did not get injuries for the first team (I have not checked but I assume some suspensions in there missed games)

Whereas we had

Bart with 36 matches
JPVH started 33 played 34
Pervis started 26 and played 29
Dunk started 23 played 25 (granted never fit so arguably lost his spot to Webster)
Veltman started 19. Played 21
Mitoma only started 28. Played in 36 (carrying injury)
Rutter started 19 played 28
Baleba started 31 played in 34
Hinshelwood started 22 played 26
Pedro started only 23. Played 27
Welbz started 24. Played 30.

We finished 8 ahead of them despite them have hardly any injuries. Mad to argue their first team is stronger imo. But that’s up to you.

I'm not sure you understand the point you're trying to make, tbh.
No we don't have a winning record over Liverpool. last 11 matches W4, D2, L5 Last 5 W1, D1, L3

I think you're saying, "it's only the Premier league that matters", "And we've had loads of injuries", "It doesn't matter that they've beaten us twice, that doesn't count, because..... injuries and stuff"
Which you've decided means their first 11 is nowhere near as good as ours.

Something like that?

Fair enough.

Game of opinions innit.

Berty23 · Tuesday at 3:26 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
I'm not sure you understand the point you're trying to make, tbh.
No we don't have a winning record over Liverpool. last 11 matches W4, D2, L5 Last 5 W1, D1, L3

I think you're saying, "it's only the Premier league that matters", "And we've had loads of injuries", "It doesn't matter that they've beaten us twice, that doesn't count, because..... injuries and stuff"
Which you've decided means their first 11 is nowhere near as good as ours.

Something like that?

Fair enough.

Game of opinions innit.

Thanks for checking Liverpool’s. So the record of last 11 is almost level. That must mean we are almost as good.

Yes I am saying that a team beating the other head to head does not prove they are better. They just happen to win that day. League table is far better proof of anything than cup runs. Winning the FA cup is far easier for teams not called Liverpool or Man City than the league. There is a reason for that. Cup wins rely on lots and lots of luck whereas the league will virtually always be won by the best team whereas as the worst go down. Just as losing in the fa cup third round does not make you worse than teams that get further.

Given you are talking about strongest eleven then injuries are massively relevant. You argue their’s is stronger than ours. Ours has not been available whereas their’s has. So how on earth can they be the better first eleven when our mix and match side for the season finished 8 points ahead of them?

Or are you saying that the side with the best eleven finishes lower? Maybe you are saying our best eleven is worse than our mix and match side?

ThePaddy · Tuesday at 3:45 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
I would argue that gap has lessened significantly in the last season.
Glasner has done a similar job on the "lesser" players that De Zerbi did on ours.

In a best 11, there isn't a single Brighton fan that would consider, Richards, Lacroix, Hughes, Kamada, Sarr, Mitchell or Nketiah.
But equally I suspect they wouldn't consider, Webster, Veltman, Estupinan, Minteh, Ayari, Weiffer, Hinshelwood.

Our depth is the big differentiator.
It's why we've managed to improve our league standing from last season.

I think you've been talking a lot of sense in this thread but I must disagree with you on Lacroix. He has been a revelation, and was in with a decent shout for our POTS award. He's one of the quickest defenders in the league and has totally changed the way we play; I'd need three or four hands to count the amount of times he has caught up to a winger breaking in behind to make a goal-saving challenge. Palace fans loved Joachim Andersen, and I think it's a testament to how good Lacroix has been (particularly after Christmas) that we haven't really missed him.

Daichi Kamada is a player who came to Palace with plenty of experience of European football & a Europa League winners medal. He made a slow start and we were beginning to think he might not be cut out for English football, but in the last few months he has come on leaps and bounds. He was the best player on the pitch in the semi-final against Villa & was outstanding against City in the final as well.

You're absolutely right when you say that Glasner has improved "lesser" players. Will Hughes is playing the best football of his career, Chris Richards has become a rock at the back & Sarr looks like one of the most deadly counter attackers in the league. We're still waiting for him to work his magic on Nketiah, though... It's hard to impress when getting limited minutes but so far he certainly hasn't sent the world alight.

You are completely correct when you say that Brighton have better depth (hardly surprising as you've spent a fortune to acquire it.)
I'd suggest that is the reason that you managed to finish 8th despite an injury crisis. Palace would have been unable to field a competitive team if we had suffered similar misfortune.

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 3:47 PM

Berty23 said:
Thanks for checking Liverpool’s. So the record of last 11 is almost level. That must mean we are almost as good.

Yes I am saying that a team beating the other head to head does not prove they are better. They just happen to win that day. League table is far better proof of anything than cup runs. Winning the FA cup is far easier for teams not called Liverpool or Man City than the league. There is a reason for that. Cup wins rely on lots and lots of luck whereas the league will virtually always be won by the best team whereas as the worst go down. Just as losing in the fa cup third round does not make you worse than teams that get further.

Given you are talking about strongest eleven then injuries are massively relevant. You argue their’s is stronger than ours. Ours has not been available whereas their’s has. So how on earth can they be the better first eleven when our mix and match side for the season finished 8 points ahead of them?

Or are you saying that the side with the best eleven finishes lower? Maybe you are saying our best eleven is worse than our mix and match side?

Game of opinions.

Their first 11 was capable of beating us twice, and winning the FA Cup.
Ours wasn't, nowhere near to it in fact.

I think that matters in defining the strength of a team.
You don't.
That's ok.

i have made similar arguments to yours in the past, but this season I just don't see it that way.
I've been to 40 matches this season and I'm pretty sure I haven't seen a single game where we have played two good halfs (halves?) against a prem team.
Maybe Southampton away, but that doesn't really count.

In fairness I've only seen them twice for 90 minutes. And in both games, they were in total control of the game.
I'm sure we will be good, I think we will be a lot better than they will be.

But from what I've seen this is their strongest first 11 I can remember.
Maybe they aren't statistically better than us. I'll defer to your view on that one.
But it certainly felt like they were, at significant moments of the past season.

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 3:51 PM

ThePaddy said:
I think you've been talking a lot of sense in this thread but I must disagree with you on Lacroix. He has been a revelation, and was in with a decent shout for our POTS award. He's one of the quickest defenders in the league and has totally changed the way we play; I'd need three or four hands to count the amount of times he has caught up to a winger breaking in behind to make a goal-saving challenge. Palace fans loved Joachim Andersen, and I think it's a testament to how good Lacroix has been (particularly after Christmas) that we haven't really missed him.

Daichi Kamada is a player who came to Palace with plenty of experience of European football & a Europa League winners medal. He made a slow start and we were beginning to think he might not be cut out for English football, but in the last few months he has come on leaps and bounds. He was the best player on the pitch in the semi-final against Villa & was outstanding against City in the final as well.

You're absolutely right when you say that Glasner has improved "lesser" players. Will Hughes is playing the best football of his career, Chris Richards has become a rock at the back & Sarr looks like one of the most deadly counter attackers in the league. We're still waiting for him to work his magic on Nketiah, though... It's hard to impress when getting limited minutes but so far he certainly hasn't sent the world alight.

You are completely correct when you say that Brighton have better depth (hardly surprising as you've spent a fortune to acquire it.)
I'd suggest that is the reason that you managed to finish 8th despite an injury crisis. Palace would have been unable to field a competitive team if we had suffered similar misfortune.

I agree about Lacroix, i just used the name in an example of comparable players.
But we are never going to choose a Palace player over a Brighton player

Which is pretty much, why my comments are causing so much irritation.

ThePaddy · Tuesday at 3:53 PM

Berty23 said:
Given you are talking about strongest eleven then injuries are massively relevant. You argue their’s is stronger than ours. Ours has not been available whereas their’s has. So how on earth can they be the better first eleven when our mix and match side for the season finished 8 points ahead of them?

Palace were only really able to play our best eleven in the second half of the season.

Half of our starting XI didn't have a pre-season break because they were playing in the finals of international tournaments. Wharton, Eze, Henderson and Guehi with England, Lerma and Munoz with Colombia, and Mateta with France. When they came back, they were either injured or exhausted. We had an awful start, dropping points against some very poor teams, and Glasner has blamed the disjointed summer for it. I happen to agree with him. Eze had a long-term foot problem, Wharton had a groin problem that required surgery, Mateta was exhausted and then nearly decapitated, etc.

If you look at the league table from mid-October onwards, when our team started to settle, we're sat in 7th with 50 points from 30 games. This is obviously a silly way to look at a season for all sorts of reasons, but it probably explains why people in the media have glowing things to say about Palace and Glasner - we've just won a trophy and after a dodgy start (easily forgettable) we have been playing very well for a long time.

Bozza · Tuesday at 3:56 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
Game of opinions.

Their first 11 was capable of beating us twice, and winning the FA Cup.
Ours wasn't, nowhere near to it in fact.

I think that matters in defining the strength of a team.
You don't.
That's ok.

i have made similar arguments to yours in the past, but this season I just don't see it that way.
I've been to 40 matches this season and I'm pretty sure I haven't seen a single game where we have played two good halfs (halves?) against a prem team.
Maybe Southampton away, but that doesn't really count.

In fairness I've only seen them twice for 90 minutes. And in both games, they were in total control of the game.
I'm sure we will be good, I think we will be a lot better than they will be.

But from what I've seen this is their strongest first 11 I can remember.
Maybe they aren't statistically better than us. I'll defer to your view on that one.
But it certainly felt like they were, at significant moments of the past season.

I'm not partaking in the wider debate, but you think they were in total control up there?

We had more possession, more shots, more shots on target, a high xG, more touches inside the box and more corners. Their keeper made more saves. Aside from that, just watching the game with my own eyes didn't leave me thinking they were in "total control" - far from it in fact.

Mellotron · Tuesday at 4:01 PM

ThePaddy said:
Brighton have better depth (hardly surprising as you've spent a fortune to acquire it.)

*sigh*

Dear me.

Uh_huh_him · Tuesday at 4:01 PM

Bozza said:
I'm not partaking in the wider debate, but you think they were in total control up there?

We had more possession, more shots, more shots on target, a high xG, more touches inside the box and more corners. Their keeper made more saves. Aside from that, just watching the game with my own eyes didn't leave me thinking they were in "total control" - far from it in fact.

Did you think we would score, though?
Considering they went down to 9 men, I would say they were in control of the situation as much as could be expected.

Might have just been Derby day nerves, but I couldn't see us ever scoring in those last 20 minutes.

edit: Just checked 0.94 xg against 9 men.

Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo · Tuesday at 4:10 PM

Uh_huh_him said:
Did you think we would score, though?
Considering they went down to 9 men, I would say they were in control of the situation as much as could be expected.

Might have just been Derby day nerves, but I couldn't see us ever scoring in those last 20 minutes.

edit: Just checked 0.94 xg against 9 men.

It wasn’t against 9 men though was it. We had a 2 man advantage for about 6 mins of the game and that came in injury time. A vast majority of the game was played 11 vs 11.

[Football] If Palace can't play in the Europa League

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Well-known member

Well-known member

teH lulZ

Well-known member

Harry Wilson's Tackle

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

You can change this

I've asked for soup

Well-known member

I believe in Joe Hendry

Share this page