Friday, January 30, 2015

Southampton’s European Roster Issues

Given the high likelihood, albeit not anything near a certainty yet, that Southampton will qualify for Europe next year, I thought I would look at the UEFA rules governing rosters—particularly those that involve home grown players.  I have been working on this post for a little while, but decided to delay it until we knew whether Jack Cork was being transferred.  For the purposes of this discussion, I assume that we have the option to retain all our loan players (both in and out) except those whose contracts are expiring.

The roster rules are the same for the Europa League and the Champions League and can be found here and here.   I am using the rules for the current season and assuming that they will be unchanged—except for age cutoff date—next season.

Each club is required to submit two different roster lists at each registration deadline.  The registration deadlines occur immediately prior to each qualification/playoff round, the group stage, and the knock out stage.  There are limitations on registering players who have already played for someone else in the same competition during the same season, but those limits do not matter right now.

The “B” list is the easier to explain.  A player is eligible to be place on Southampton’s “B” list if they were born on or after 1 January 1994 and were eligible to play for Southampton for any two uninterrupted years since their 15th birthday.  If they are 16, then need to have been registered with Southampton for the last two years.  There is no limit to the number of players who can be registered on the B list.
I went through the official Southampton FC website (and other sources—but not Football Manager) and came up with a list of 27 B list eligible players for next season.  I chose to stop my list with the second year scholars because the younger players are unlikely to play for us in Europe next year.  Very likely all the first year scholars would also be eligible for the B list. 
One second year scholar, Marcus Barnes, does not appear to be eligible for the B list because he has not been with the club long enough, but it is close.  He would be eligible for the knockout stage B list.  I doubt he will play in European competition next year, but he would have to be registered on the A list to be eligible for the earlier phases of the competition.
Southampton can register up to 25 players on the A list.  However, at least eight players must be “locally trained” and at least four of those players must be “club-trained.”  The other four can be “association-trained.”
“Club-trained” players are ones who have been registered with Southampton for three full seasons between ages 15 and 21.  The seasons can include the ones where the player turns 15 or 21.  Thus, Morgan Schneiderlin is club-trained.  He was born on 8 November 1989.  He came to Southampton at age 18 in 2008 and was registered with us for the next three full seasons—the seasons during which he turned 19, 20, and 21. I think he would also qualify as club-trained at Strasbourg because he was registered with them in the seasons he turned 15, 16, 17, and 18.
As best I can tell, the only other player who qualifies as club-trained is Lloyd Isgrove who joined Southampton at age nine and has been here ever since except for a single loan spell which does not disqualify him.
An “association-trained” player is one who has been registered with one or more clubs from the same association for three seasons or 36 months between the ages of 15 and 21.  Obviously, all club-trained players are also association-trained players for the nation in which the club is registered.  Our association-trained players are all pretty obvious except for American Cody Cropper who was registered with Ipswich Town before he turned 18. (See here.) 
If a club does not have enough club-trained or association-trained players, it must leave the roster spots empty.  This means that, right now, our A list could only have 23 players on it because we do not have enough club-trained players.  This is not a real problem right now because we only have 24 players to fit onto the A list and that includes Barnes, Osvaldo, and Ramirez.  (I am assuming that Ramirez and Osvaldo are finished here—although I do list them.) It does represent a potential problem if we transfer in more than two new players this summer.
Not surprisingly, these rules make Morgan Schneiderlin very important.  We cannot fully replace him.  We might be able to replace him on the field, but we cannot replace his roster spot.  If he goes in the summer, we can only register 22 players on the A list.
Isgrove is also important.  Unless the club decides that he is worse than no one, he must (and, therefore, probably will) be retained for next season.
Our low number of club-trained players probably seems strange given our history of bringing young academy players into the first team, but it really isn’t.  The academy players who are under 21 get registered on the B list.  If we had needed to register for Europe in 2013-2014, our only club-trained players would have been Schneiderlin and Lallana.  This year it would have been Schneiderlin and no one else.
These rules create the possibility of some rather strange (but unlikely) transfer decisions.  If we bought Nathan Dyer from Swansea, he would count as a club-trained player for us.  I do not mean to suggest that such a transfer is likely, but Dyer would not take up an extra European roster slot.  (Gareth Bale, Theo Walcott, and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlin would also help in this same way.  Maybe we should offer to take a couple of them on loan next season.)
This does not mean that we will be short of players to compete next season.  Our B list contains Ward-Prowse, Reed, Targett, and Gallagher all of whom will play for us next season.  Very likely if we are playing in Europe Mayuka will not be on the roster and Rodriguez will either be healthy or replaced.   I also think it is unlikely that our back up goalies will be Davis, Cropper, and Gazzaniga.
That being said, we do have limited flexibility.  We would want to keep our two club-trained players, five association-trained players, and ten other players leaving only six openings for additional players which needs to include any backup goalie upgrades.  (The numbers change if loaned players are not retained.)
This is the jigsaw puzzle now facing the club’s management, with the additional problem that they do not yet know whether we are going to be playing in Europe or at what level.  Lots more money is available to purchase new players if we are in the Champions League, but unless we finish third or higher we cannot count on having that money.  The fourth place playoff is not played until late in the transfer window.  It may well be that an additional consequence of losing that playoff will be the sale of Schneiderlin and Clyne to clubs that are still in the competition.  This is probably one reason why Clyne’s contract status needs to be resolved sooner than Schneiderlin’s.
It is also difficult for the club to determine whether it needs to buy English players.  We could lose Bertrand, Clyne, and Rodriguez this summer.  That would leave us with only five players for the four association-trained slots, but that includes Barnes, Cropper, and Kelvin Davis.  Obviously, we would need to upgrade on that selection.  On the other hand, if we keep two of the three potential departees we do not need to buy English.
The jigsaw puzzle is further complicated by the more stringent European Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules and (these days) exchange rates.  Southampton lost £12 million in 2012 and £7 million in 2013.  While the FFP loses are less than that, a similar loss for last season would have Southampton pushing right at the limits of what is permitted by UEFA—especially given the fall in value of the Euro.  If Southampton is heading for a profit this year, that sign of progress will undoubtedly negate any real problems with UEFA, but that is a reason to delay finalizing any transactions past 30 June 2015 so that the profit on last summer’s transfers shows up as a bottom line profit this year.
There are, of course, other complications which I cannot ascertain either because I do not have access to the necessary information or because I know absolutely nothing about them.
In any case, here is the roster eligibility list I compiled:
A LIST PLAYERS
Other                    Association Trained         Club Trained
Alderweireld        Bertrand                              Isgrove
Elia                        Barnes                                  Schneiderlin
Fonte                    Clyne 
Gardos                 Cropper
Gazzaniga            Davis, K
Long                      Davis, S
Mane                    Forster
Mayuka                Rodriguez
Osvaldo
Pelle
Ramirez
Tadic
Wanyama
Yoshida
B LIST PLAYERS
Britt
Clinton
Deasy
Debayo
Demkiv
Gallagher
Gape
Hesketh
Irvine
Isted
Johnson
Little
Mason
McCarthy
McQueen
Mugabi
Reed
Regis
Rowe
Seager
Sims
Sinclair
Stephens
Targett
Turnbull
Ward-Prowse
Wood

Monday, January 26, 2015

I Make Predictions (Round 23)

I did better this round.   Mark Lawrenson got four games right for four points.  His celebrity guest got five games right for seven points.  Merson got four games right for six points.  I got six games right for eight points.  At least I think this is right.  Merson made it hard for me by putting his predictions in the wrong order.

Since I started eleven rounds ago I have predicted 53 out of 110 games correctly for 83 points.  Lawrenson predicted 54 games correctly for 70 points. Merson predicted 52 games correctly for 70 points.
I will link to Lawrenson’s and Merson’s new predictions when they are published.  They will be found here and here.
Here are my predictions using the same rules outlined here. 
Hull-Newcastle                                                 1-2
Palace-Everton                                                 1-1
Liverpool-West Ham                                       1-1
Man U-Leicester                                              1-0
Stoke-QPR                                                        2-1
Sunderland-Burnley                                       2-1
West Brom-Spurs                                            1-2
Chelsea-Man City                                            2-1
Arsenal-Aston Villa                                          1-0
Southampton-Swansea                                  1-0
I have been thinking about an inconsistency in my system.  Roughly, one in three games ends in a draw and one in three games is decided by two or more goals.  Yet, I am willing to predict draws, but not two goal victories.  I did not think about this when I created the system, but I am satisfied with the discrepancy.
If you are trying to get the result (but not the score) right, you need draws because they count as a different result.  You do not need two goal victories because they are the same result as a one goal victory.
When you are trying to get the score right, draws do not hurt your chances very much.  Realistically speaking you are only going to pick 0-0, 1-1, or 2-2 draws and 1-1 draws seem to be the most common.  A 1-1 draw is, therefore, a result that is likely to occur.
Similarly, 1-0 and 2-1 victories are very common results.  3-2 victories are much less common, so there is no reason to pick them.  On the other hand, once you decided to try to predict victories by two or more goals, you have opened many more possibilities: 2-0, 3-1, 4-2, 3-0, 4-1, 5-2, 4-0, etc.  Even if you are right about the team that is going to win and by how much, you are still very likely to get the exact score wrong.

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Financial Fair Play: Friend or Foe

This is not an analysis of the merits of the Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules.  I am not attempting to prove that they are good or bad for football in general or for English football in particular.  Instead, I only intend to address the purely selfish question of whether the Financial Fair Play rules are good or bad for Southampton FC.

The consensus seems to be that the rules hurt Southampton because they limit our ability to spend the money necessary to compete with the big boys who are allowed to spend a lot more money that we are because they already have so much more money than we do.  As a results, we can never catch up.  The financial results for the 2012-2013 season (the last season for which all teams have reported their results) seem to back this up.  See here. 
On the surface it is a depressing list.  Consider the turnover in millions of pounds listed by last season’s order of finish:
Manchester City                £271
Liverpool                            £206
Chelsea                               £260
Arsenal                               £283
Everton                              £86
Tottenham                        £147
Manchester United         £363
Southampton                   £72
Stoke                                 £67
Newcastle                        £96
Crystal Palace                  £14.5*
Swansea                           £67
West Ham                        £91
Sunderland                      £76
Aston Villa                        £84
Hull                                    £17*
West Brom                       £70
Norwich                            £85
Fulham                              £73
Cardiff                               £17.3*
*In Championship during prior season.  See here. 
Of the top seven teams, only Everton stands out as a low revenue anomaly.  From eighth on down, the table position and the revenue do not seem that directly correlated—at least if you ignore the newly promoted teams—but it looks difficult to break into the top six without a lot more money than we have.
Some clubs have reported their financial results for 2013-2014. (I will be relying upon The Swiss Ramble and its analysis of this information found here.)   Based upon this information, it appears to be more of the same.  Every Premier League club has significantly increased revenue due to the new TV contracts but the richer teams have increased their revenue even beyond that, while the not-so-rich teams have relied entirely on the increase in TV revenue.  
Thus, Stoke’s turnover is up by nearly £32 million—due to its higher league position and the vastly increased value of the league TV contracts.  Chelsea’s turnover has increased by £64 million due to the TV deals, its Champions League performance, and £30 million in additional commercial revenue.  West Ham’s turnover is up £25 million entirely due to TV money mitigated by its lower table spot.  Manchester City’s turnover is £75 million higher due to the TV contract, better Champions League performance, and increases of £8 million and £23 million in match day and commercial revenue respectively.  Everton’s revenue is £24 million higher more than all of which is due to the increased TV money.  Finally, Manchester United’s revenue was up just over £70 million--£37 million commercial and £34 million TV revenue, including Champions League money.
Although Southampton’s financial results are not yet available it is certain that our turnover has increased significantly as well.  It certainly should have increased by more than Stoke’s £32 million.  The Deloitte Money League ranks Southampton as 25th in world with turnover of £97.3 million.  See here.    This number seems low to me.  I would have guessed something like £108 million.  (The difference may be due to exchange rate timing issues since Deloitte issues its results in Euros.)
Since FFP limits our ability to spend very much beyond what we take in, on the surface these numbers seem to conclusively establish than FFP means we will never be allowed to catch up with the big boys.  However, the message is not quite so clear.
In Part Four of my Glass Ceiling blog post last fall (found here) I concluded that FFP was not the big limiting factor on Southampton’s ambitions unless Katharina Liebherr actually wanted to make capital contributions well in excess of £8 million a year—the effective limit if we were planning to compete in Europe on a regular basis (and there would be no point in kicking in that much money year after year if we were not).  From that perspective, FFP is actually a benefit to Southampton because we no longer have to compete with the owners of Chelsea or Manchester City who appear willing to contribute £100 million or more, year after year.  More importantly, we do not have to worry about another team, say Crystal Palace, being bought by a billionaire who wants to spend hundreds of millions of pounds improving their side.
In fact, this benefit of the FFP rules enhances our competitive position throughout Europe.  The biggest barrier to our continued progress is the risk that our good players will be lured away from us by the promise of much higher pay and/or European football.  Yet, any team with European ambitions has to comply with FFP and only 24 teams in the world have more money to spend than we do: three from Spain, three from Germany, two from France, five from Italy, one from Turkey, and ten from England.  (Moreover, despite their higher turnover, several of these clubs have significant financial problems that will limit their spending.)  That means that very few clubs can afford to outspend us to take our players (or compete with us for new signings).   This is particularly true going forward because it seems virtually certain that the Premier League TV contracts for 2016-2019 will be even more lucrative than the current contracts thereby increasing our advantage even more.
Consider, for example, the effect this financial strength had on this year’s transfer business.  (I am using the Football Manager (FM) 2014 and 2015 databases for this comparison.  I have listed Southampton’s weekly salaries here for reference.  )
Eljero Elia was Werder Bremen’s highest paid player at £45K.  We can afford that.  Pelle was Feyenoord's highest paid player at £21K.  We gave him a raise to £37K.  Mane was making £6K and now we are paying him £45K.  Tadic was making £16.5 and we are paying him £42K.  Long was making £30K and is now getting £50K. Forster was getting £23K and is now getting £40K. Bertrand was and is getting £35K.  Alderweireld is a weird case.  FM 2014 shows him as earning £14.5K but FM 2015 has us paying him nearly all of his £86K salary.  I do not know if he signed a new contract with Athletico Madrid at some point or if FM made a mistake, but it does not really matter because they are one of the few teams with a higher turnover than us so we will probably not be taking players from them based upon a willingness to out pay them.
In other words, our inherent strengths, which include the Premier League TV contracts, the quality of our management, and the limits imposed by FFP, mean that we can buy players away from virtually any team in the world, but very few teams can afford to buy players away from us.  Of course, it is a problem that we are in a league with ten of those teams—a problem Bayern Munich, PSG, Real Madrid, and Barcelona do not share—but that problem is not created by FFP.  Instead, FFP gives us a chance to live within our means and continue to improve—at least as long as we remain one of the better run clubs.  We will lose players to the richer English clubs and that will make things difficult at times, but we will turn a profit and replace the players relatively cheaply from other European clubs.  If we qualify for Europe, especially the Champions League, players from all over the world will be beating on our door begging to play for us.  So long as we exercise good judgment as to which ones we sign, FFP is our friend.

Friday, January 16, 2015

Milestone 20,556

I was going to post a milestone update as soon as I hit 20,000 page views, but the page views jumped suddenly in the past week such that my fourth highest day of all time (388) unexpectedly occurred on January 12.  It was highest daily total since August 5, 2014.  This was inconvenient because this is the type of post I like to write in advance.

I attribute my moderate recent increase in page views to following the advice of two people who post on SaintsWeb under the names Bearsy and eurosaint.  Bearsy advised:
Redslo is good people! I think he should maybe restrict himself to factual matters tho i.e. doing the research and explaining the facts behind things that are dimly understood, like the stuff he did on FFP which was v.excellent. The 30 hours he put in on Football Manager to find out if Jack Cork will sign new contract, perhaps less so. I would like Redslo to review the Laws of the Game like they are Legal Contract using his Lawyer skills and advise whether i.e. Fabregas or Targett should have been prosecuted in the Chelsea match. That is my suggestion for Redslo blogs! Do things bout Rules & Facts & Lawyer Skills!
Editing out the humor, I took this as advice to not go crazy spending huge amounts of time on research projects and to focus on the areas of my expertise.
Eurosaint opined:
I'm sure that you mean well Redslo but I have to confess that after reading about 10% of what you have written I lost the will to live
Perhaps if you were to keep your points a bit more concise they would have more of an impact ?
Anyway, happy new year to you !
I took this as advice to be more concise and to avoid depriving people of the will to live.  (By the way, eurosaint, if you are still reading you might want to stop.  I think the rest of this post will be will to live sapping for you.)
I decided to write more timely and focused posts.  There were several subjects I wanted to post on this past summer and fall, but I kept expanding the scope of the research to where it became unmanageable—my third party ownership piece is the prime example.  I just should have written up something during our pursuit of Rojo.  Instead, I kept reading and taking notes on more and more stuff until it felt like I was writing a master’s thesis.  Since I didn’t want to write a master’s thesis on that subject, I stopped working on it completely.  There are three or four other projects that went the same way.
In line with this new approach, I wrote up and immediately published several recent posts including “Doom and Gloom,” “ European Qualification Rules for Southampton Fans,” “Possible Gaston Ramirez Transfer to Boca Juniors May not be Possible,” and “Southampton Weekly Salaries.”  Two of these posts used my legal skills, one used my willingness to tabulate a moderate number of statistics, and one used my willingness to crib data from Football Manager—always a popular feature of my blog.
In any case, all four of these posts have turned out to be reasonably popular based upon the direct page views which understates the actual viewership because page views of my main page are not counted in the total.  Here are the most popular posts for the past month.

Posts


Entry
Pageviews
Jan 5, 2015
176
Jan 12, 2015
86
Dec 26, 2014
59
Dec 25, 2014
46
Jan 9, 2015
39
Jan 13, 2015
39
Dec 31, 2014, 2 comments
35
Aug 1, 2014
33
Dec 22, 2014
33
Dec 31, 2014
33

My all-time popular posts are dominated by posts from my first few days of blogging when, due to twitter referrals, things went crazy.  However, two of the recent posts are on the top ten list as is my post on how I became a Southampton fan which was not all that popular when it first was published but has been looked at steadily since then.  It was my most popular directly viewed post from mid-October through mid-December.  This is the all-time top ten:

Posts


Entry
Pageviews
Aug 1, 2014
1322
Jul 30, 2014, 1 comment
493
Aug 4, 2014
363
Aug 5, 2014, 1 comment
274
Aug 1, 2014
203
Jan 5, 2015
176
Aug 17, 2014
115
Aug 26, 2014, 2 comments
105
Jan 12, 2015
86
Aug 9, 2014, 2 comments
84

This does not mean that  I will no longer undertake complicated research projects, but I will try to find ways to do the research in smaller chunks to generate a shorter, timely post.  I will only go crazy on rare occasions when the subject seem especially important or interesting (to me).  So thank you Bearsy and eurosaint for the good advice.
If anyone else has any suggestions or comments, I am happy to hear them.  Post them here or on the threads devoted to my blog on Saints Web or The Ugly Inside.
And I have one question:  whenever I post something I almost always immediately get a hit from Mountain View, California, which is just over 200 miles from where I live but only a couple of miles from where I group up.  Do I really have a regular reader there or is that a weird internet thing that makes my own page view checking to see if everything posted properly show up as a hit from Mountain View?  If you read my blog in Mountain View, please let me know.
Finally, I am updating the statistics I published in my last milestone post.
Here is where my page views are coming from:
Entry
Pageviews
United Kingdom
14267
United States
2311
France
521
Australia
470
Spain
188
Sweden
188
Netherlands
147
Malaysia
130
Canada
116
Germany
91

Here is the browser and operating system information:
Pageviews by Browsers

Entry
Pageviews
Safari
8149 (39%)
Chrome
5803 (28%)
Firefox
2211 (10%)
Internet Explorer
2036 (9%)
Mobile Safari
1078 (5%)
Mobile
705 (3%)
CriOS
147 (<1%)
OS;FBSV
143 (<1%)
GSA
62 (<1%)
Opera
62 (<1%)

Pageviews by Operating Systems

Entry
Pageviews
Windows
7124 (34%)
iPhone
4044 (19%)
iPad
3208 (15%)
Android
3151 (15%)
Macintosh
2452 (11%)
Linux
237 (1%)
Other Unix
167 (<1%)
iPod
36 (<1%)
BlackBerry
19 (<1%)
iPod touch
19 (<1%)