Despite what happened against Fulham, I still believe we’ll avoid relegation this season, so maybe it’s time to turn to what comes next — and what happens to the “model” that’s taken us this far.
We know the current model has two major parts: invest heavily in the club’s infrastructure and buy young (and often raw) players with long-term prospects who buy into the “project” — albeit it appears the original model was tweaked after the Tony Mowbray era with an acceptance that some older and more experienced
players should be added to the mix.
It’s taken us from the days of journeymen players with no attachment to the club or its supporters to the Premier League — all good so far, particularly as survival was far from a given immediately after the playoff final.
We all know that when the current owners arrived, there was a five-year plan to get into the Premier League, but the next stage is less clear. We can be confident the first year plan was survival, and that alone, but what do the next four years bring and at what cost?
Brighton and Brentford are established Premier League teams that have already mastered the basic model we now employ — that of selling one or two of their best players each season at a substantial profit and reinvesting.
From the outside their ambitions seem limited, so is being “established” in the Premier League, perhaps with the occasional cup run, enough for the current owners? Slow and continued growth might be the plan — or the plan may include European qualification in some form in the next four years.
It might be that the owners want to drive the club to the point where they can cash out at maximum profit.
Their target might be to ultimately buy back into Marseille FC — where Margarita Louis-Dreyfus still holds a 5% stake — or Kyril Louis-Dreyfus’ ultimate plan might be to try and win or at the very least qualify for the Champions League, be that at Sunderland or elsewhere.
Let’s assume the plan is to achieve some level of European qualification over the next four seasons.
Given that Brighton played in the UEFA Europa League then, given time and good management, the model that brought us this far might get us there, but would that model drive us all the way to the Champions League? It’s true Brighton and Brentford aren’t big clubs, but the highest they’ve managed using a similar approach to Sunderland is ninth.
Therefore, I suggest that if the goal is the Champions League, it requires a different model.
This would almost certainly mean minimal chances of bringing through academy graduates, as buying prospects with the hope of blooding them over an extended period of games would only work if you follow the Chelsea trading model.
It would also mean bringing in players who’ll happily kiss the badge but have little real connection to the club and who will be off given the first signs of trouble.
So, to the thorny subject of supporter expectations — especially given the fallout after the Fulham game. How big a percentage are just happy we’ve survived this season and aren’t too up or down after a win or loss, the Newcastle result excluded, of course?
How many of our fans are happy to accept the limitations of the “model” and go along for the ride? How large a percentage are only prepared to support the win, or worst case, draw — and for how many is it “Champions League or bust”?
I’ve sat through the years of journeymen players.
I have reservations about the humanity of Chelsea’s “farming young players for profit” model. I like the current connection between the players and supporters. The club is well run and there appears to be a genuine willingness to engage with supporters’ groups, so I’m happy with the model that brought us to this point.
If it takes us into Europe, that would be great; if it doesn’t, it’s OK. Excuse my lack of ambition, but I’d prefer to follow the current path rather than push too hard and break things.
A final question to ponder is given that season ticket renewals have just begun, what do we pay for? Is it simply entertainment, glory at all costs, or something else?
