Our "crisis" season may end up better than Liverpool's and Chelsea", but conversely their successful seasons are far more successful than ours and a lot more often. Swings and roundabouts my friend.
I disagree that how and why are short term. They are part of the long term strategy of the club or at least should be. The model will say we spend relatively xxx in xxx circumstance. This should be ingrained as the operating model that influences all decisions. The immediate effect might be short term but with the medium and long term in mind.
Not disagreeing mate, but I think my point is
- United is in a class of their own, their income has protected them from a decade+ of awful management
- A successful Liverpool will also be competitive, as will Arsenal based on their decades of success (head start)
- City, Chelsea & Saudi Sportswashing Machine have the cheat mode on
Then you have Spurs, who via the work done by ENIC/Levy are above the rest, typically £200M-£250M/yr in additional revenue over anyone else in the league (obviously not the ones above), 13+ years in Europe in a row
- And you then have about 4 clubs that are pretty safe
- And from about 10th down, regardless of what anyone says, those clubs start a season thinking about survival first, everything else second.
This is our problem
- Too big to be classified with the rest
- Not big enough to compete at top level
So yes
- A better strategy, better manager choices and a little luck could get us the occasional win we should have had
- But it will take even more money (sugar daddy) to truly compete
And if people don't get the last point, it's going to be a circle fudge of toxicity as expectations just aren't inline with reality.