Which are the best/worst run clubs in the PL?

Botim

Full Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
662
Supports
Royal Antwerp FC
Just saw a shortlist of candidates for the Everton job: Martinez, Rooney, Kovac and Lampard. Add to that another year of expensive transfer mistakes and it seems some clubs just never seem to learn from their mistakes.

Who do you think are currently (as in: last 5-10 years or so) the best and worst run clubs in the league, given their budget, history and expectations? Here's my choices:

Best:
1) Leicester: absolutely brilliant long-term planning, loads of great transfers and manager appointments. Won a PL and FA Cup on fairly modest budget.
2) Brighton: started with a new stadium ten years ago, been climbing up ever since. Doing very well on a tiny budget with a positive approach to football
3) Man City: yes, they swim in cash, but you can't fault their strategy and vision.

honourable mentions: Aston Villa, Wolves, Chelsea

Worst:
1) Everton: should be regular top 4 contenders, given the money they spend and the size of their fanbase, but continually keep getting worse since the Moyes days.
2) Man United: had no plan for SAF's retirement, wasted a billion on mostly mediocre talent, keep appointing totally different types of managers who try and overhaul the whole squad
3) Arsenal: doing a bit better lately, but had a dreadfully underwhelming decade. Like United, had no plan at all for the succession of their most successful manager ever.

dishonourable mentions: Watford, Norwich
 

MO_Football92

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 7, 2021
Messages
354
Supports
Arsenal
Just saw a shortlist of candidates for the Everton job: Martinez, Rooney, Kovac and Lampard. Add to that another year of expensive transfer mistakes and it seems some clubs just never seem to learn from their mistakes.

Who do you think are currently (as in: last 5-10 years or so) the best and worst run clubs in the league, given their budget, history and expectations? Here's my choices:

Best:
1) Leicester: absolutely brilliant long-term planning, loads of great transfers and manager appointments. Won a PL and FA Cup on fairly modest budget.
2) Brighton: started with a new stadium ten years ago, been climbing up ever since. Doing very well on a tiny budget with a positive approach to football
3) Man City: yes, they swim in cash, but you can't fault their strategy and vision.

honourable mentions: Aston Villa, Wolves, Chelsea

Worst:
1) Everton: should be regular top 4 contenders, given the money they spend and the size of their fanbase, but continually keep getting worse since the Moyes days.
2) Man United: had no plan for SAF's retirement, wasted a billion on mostly mediocre talent, keep appointing totally different types of managers who try and overhaul the whole squad
3) Arsenal: doing a bit better lately, but had a dreadfully underwhelming decade. Like United, had no plan at all for the succession of their most successful manager ever.

dishonourable mentions: Watford, Norwich
Underwhelming like consistently reaching top four winning fa cups and community shields whilst paying off the stadium?

Underachievement began when supporters hounded out Wenger and yes, the last two seasons have been unacceptable. But generally this decade we've done well.
 

Botim

Full Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
662
Supports
Royal Antwerp FC
Underwhelming like consistently reaching top four winning fa cups and community shields whilst paying off the stadium?

Underachievement began when supporters hounded out Wenger and yes, the last two seasons have been unacceptable. But generally this decade we've done well.
That's very generous I would say. Wenger papered over the cracks, but you have now missed top 4 for 5 seasons in a row. The decade before that, you never missed it even once. You've also spend a shit tonne of money.

The fact you even mention the community shield as an achievement just proves how far you've fallen. To be clear, for any other club, a couple of FA Cups and top 8 would be fine, I just remember the Arsenal that was a title contender. Maybe I'm a bit harsh?
 

golden_blunder

Site admin. Manchester United fan
Staff
Joined
Jun 1, 2000
Messages
119,437
Location
Dublin, Ireland
I feel like you should separate it out a bit to find out how the overall club is doing :

football: recent achievements, form, position etc
Financial: how is the club financially?
Sponsorship/marketing: are the clubs making the most of the opportunities
 

Powderfinger

Full Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2015
Messages
2,196
Supports
Arsenal
Aston Villa got relegated five years ago and then were a hair away from getting relegated again two years ago. They are spending lots of money and things look to be on an upswing currently but I have a difficult time saying they are among the best run clubs in the PL.

I think Brentford are a very well run club. We'll see how long they last in the PL but they are really punching above their weight to be there.

Palace doesn't get enough credit for just keeping their place in the PL for so long. Its hard for clubs like that to stick around and they've done it without massive investment from a billionaire owner or shady connections to Jorge Mendes like Wolves. And in the last year they've managed to turn over a lot of their roster while adding a number of pretty exciting younger players and a promising new manager.
 

tentan

Poor man's poster.
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Messages
4,503
Best

1. Man City - Clear strategy and direction.
2. Chelsea - Always seems to win despite having a new manager every year
3. Leicester - Shouldn't be anywhere near where they are and achieved.


Worst

1. Man United - No clear strategy and direction.
2. Arsenal - No longer a big club.
3. Newcastle - A right mess.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,047
Location
Blitztown
Best
City
Liverpool
Chelsea
Norwich
Brighton
Wolves

Worst
United
Newcastle
Everton
Spurs
Watford
 

Dancfc

Full Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
7,392
Supports
Chelsea
We're not remotely close to being the best run.

We're not incompetently ran but we're far from the best. We have the combination of resources plus academy player's coming through to be fully challenging City but we haven't troubled them in the league for 5 years now.
 

UnrelatedPsuedo

I pity the poor fool who stinks like I do!
Joined
Apr 15, 2015
Messages
10,047
Location
Blitztown
We're not remotely close to being the best run.

We're not incompetently ran but we're far from the best. We have the combination of resources plus academy player's coming through to be fully challenging City but we haven't troubled them in the league for 5 years now.
You operate on very clear principles thought. I heard last week that in 14 of 17 seasons under Roman you’ve either won the league, or fired the manager.

You’re the most successful English club since he took over.

Your periods of chaos last a season or less. It must feel awful being a fan as it’s just constant churn. But you do operate to principles. Those principles deliver results.
 

Botim

Full Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
662
Supports
Royal Antwerp FC
This transfer window confirmed some of my initial picks for badly run clubs...

Arsenal have sold or loaned out 6-8 players, yet have brought in nobody new, despite very clearly needing a new attacker. Can't see them getting top 4 now. Their only saving grace is that United, as we all expected, have done similarly underwhelming business (and have also lost the one we can't speak of).

Everton at least seem to be trying to turn the tide (in their usual throw-stuff-at-the-wall-and-hope-something-sticks kind of style), although I don't think Lampard will be a success either.
 

Hastar

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 2, 2021
Messages
174
Supports
Liverpool
FSG have their issues, off and on the pitch at times, but they have substantially transformed the club for the better. I still believe they are content with top four. Anyways...

Under David Moores we wasted our financial potential, which Manchester United brilliantly exploited through the nineties and 2000s. That has changed for the good now.

The stadium redevelopment was a better idea than building a new stadium. Anfield has an aura, that would be difficult to replicate.

And they have also improved their transfer strategy through trial and error, by finally appointing Edwards, who has now passed the torch to Julian Ward.
 

FootballHQ

Full Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2017
Messages
18,139
Supports
Aston Villa
Brentford by a complete mile as number one.

I'd still argue Southampton generally do o.k and should be up there. O.K were more competitive in top half a few seasons back but generally back manager when he gets bad results and they remain competitive despite selling key players.

Think Wolves have done pretty well last few years although can understand their transfer model leaving neutrals cold.

Someone like us (Villa) is more work in progress tbh.

Everton been a complete disaster in last few years so they'd be worst run club for me and some of Watford's decision making regarding managers has been very odd aswell.
 

Lowkey

Full Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
3,249
Location
Behind You
People putting Liverpool in the best category is cringe. Klopp is basically plastering over the major cracks and flaws that they have like SAF did with us. They were one game away last season from losing either Salah or Mane. If we actually beat them at home and they did not get top 4 last season, the panick button would have been hit.

BEST - City, Leicester, Brighton, Southampton,

WORST - United, Everton, Arsenal, Newcastle
 

Blood Mage

Full Member
Joined
Aug 25, 2019
Messages
5,822
Best - Liverpool and Leicester

Worst - Manchester United and Newcastle. Only Barcelona are run worse than these two clubs at the moment in top flight football.

Sick of hearing that oil clubs are run well. They have bottomless pits of cash, of course they're doing alright, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have genius planners and visionaries behind the scenes.
 

steffyr2

Full Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2005
Messages
1,772
Manchester United to the top of the worst in not seeing the Greenwood handwriting on the wall and getting rid.

Barcelona at #2. I still don't understand how they could be in such bad financial straits.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
893
Best run clubs maybe Brighton, Liverpool, Leicester and West Ham.

Worst run club probably Man Utd for obvious reasons but also Man City. I say Man City because they have not won a lot considering the resources at their disposal. Liverpool and Leister both beat them to the PL despite spending like a billion less
 

KingCavani

New Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2021
Messages
1,264
We're not remotely close to being the best run.

We're not incompetently ran but we're far from the best. We have the combination of resources plus academy player's coming through to be fully challenging City but we haven't troubled them in the league for 5 years now.
There's few clubs in the world paying more for less than United.

We are horrendously run as it pertains to football, probably because the football is secondary to the business.
 

shaky

Full Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
2,515
People putting Liverpool in the best category is cringe. Klopp is basically plastering over the major cracks and flaws that they have like SAF did with us. They were one game away last season from losing either Salah or Mane. If we actually beat them at home and they did not get top 4 last season, the panick button would have been hit.

BEST - City, Leicester, Brighton, Southampton,

WORST - United, Everton, Arsenal, Newcastle
Agree. Liverpool's owners are not much different to the Glazers. Klopp's the one that has transformed Liverpool, despite the owners, not because of them. One of the wealthiest clubs in the world, dithering over Salah's new deal, yet their fans have convinced themselves that a low net spend is some sort of badge of honour and spending big money is only something evil rich teams like us and City do.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2021
Messages
893
Agree. Liverpool's owners are not much different to the Glazers. Klopp's the one that has transformed Liverpool, despite the owners, not because of them. One of the wealthiest clubs in the world, dithering over Salah's new deal, yet their fans have convinced themselves that a low net spend is some sort of badge of honour and spending big money is only something evil rich teams like us and City do.
People putting Liverpool in the best category is cringe. Klopp is basically plastering over the major cracks and flaws that they have like SAF did with us. They were one game away last season from losing either Salah or Mane. If we actually beat them at home and they did not get top 4 last season, the panick button would have been hit.

BEST - City, Leicester, Brighton, Southampton,

WORST - United, Everton, Arsenal, Newcastle
Come on guys, your not giving Liverpool anywhere near the credit they deserve. Their best earners such as Mane and Salah are on a fraction compared to Pogba, Sanchez, Martial and other awful that mistakes we have made.
That is not down to Klopp, that is down to Liverpool having a good strategy. They have also signed excellent players and got good money for selling players.

That is all down to the good structure the owners have put in place in regards to scouting and signing players. Not to mention, they identified and signed Klopp which is a great decision as you both said.
 

Nytram Shakes

cannot lust
Joined
Feb 2, 2014
Messages
5,266
Location
Auckland
Best Run Clubs:
City
Liverpool
Leicester
Southampton
Brentford

Worst:
Us (United)
Everton
Arsenal
Palace

I did think about mention Villa in the worst category because they are spending far above what they can afford

Also thought about mentioning Brighton in the best run clubs, but yeah they are doing well this season but they there success rate in the transfer market before this year was not good.
 

Code_Red

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
88
Location
Manchester, UK
Agree. Liverpool's owners are not much different to the Glazers. Klopp's the one that has transformed Liverpool, despite the owners, not because of them. One of the wealthiest clubs in the world, dithering over Salah's new deal, yet their fans have convinced themselves that a low net spend is some sort of badge of honour and spending big money is only something evil rich teams like us and City do.
It’s easier to give Liverpool’s owners the benefit of the doubt considering how they transformed the fortunes of the Boston Red Sox. It wasn’t through chance but recognising a paradigm shift in baseball was taking place and getting ahead of the curve. They’ve taken the same approach to Liverpool and their record in the transfer market is very good. There is enough change within Liverpool that mirrors what happened at the Red Sox to say that the owners have made a positive impact on the club.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
49,672
Location
W.Yorks
City get sponsored by organisations that don't even exist and its all fine. Definitely one of if not the best.
 

Guy Incognito

Full Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
17,714
Location
Somewhere
Agree. Liverpool's owners are not much different to the Glazers. Klopp's the one that has transformed Liverpool, despite the owners, not because of them. One of the wealthiest clubs in the world, dithering over Salah's new deal, yet their fans have convinced themselves that a low net spend is some sort of badge of honour and spending big money is only something evil rich teams like us and City do.
Klopp has but Edwards was probably instrumental to their success in terms of closing out deals so the manager doesn't have to worry about off the pitch matters. Bit like what Dein was to Wenger.

I think Edwards has left now though, but had recommended a replacement?
 

Cloud7

Full Member
Joined
Jan 11, 2016
Messages
12,776
United and Arsenal are definitely the two worst run teams in the league.

I wonder what the reaction would have been if you told fans of either of these two teams in let’s say 2005 that in the year 2022 United and Arsenal would be by far the worst run teams in the league.

Personally I still have a hard time believing it and I’ve watched it play out in real time. I look at where we used to be, the resources we have available, and where we are now, and it’s staggering just how badly we have been run and the position we have found ourselves in.
 

RedRonaldo

Wishes to be oppressed.
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
18,996
Best
City
Liverpool
Chelsea
Leicester
Brighton

Worst
United
Newcastle
Everton
 

marktan

Full Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2017
Messages
6,907
Best in order:
- Brighton and Brentford, not surprising given the footballing betting background of the two owners. A lot of use of data.
- Leceister
- Palace - they've signed some excellent young players over the last 3 or so years.
- Liverpool but mostly because of Klopp's signings, their owners refusing to spend much over the last 2 years really hindered their growth as a team.

- Everton and United - shit signings, basically the same clueless footballing people in the club, same useless board, just different budget range.
- Norwich - yeah they spend within their means, but selling Buendia who lit up the Championship last season for £30m and signing crap to replace him is a one way ticket straight back down.
- Burnley - barely spend, tired squad. I'm being a bit harsh on Norwich and Burnley as I respect they spend within their means, unlike clubs like Villa that are using their rich owner's money. But there has to be a reasonable balance to it - if you don't spend enough or well you'll find yourself in the Championship and it's not an easy task to get out of it.
 

KiD MoYeS

Good Craig got his c'nuppins
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
32,863
Location
Love is Blind
Best
Leicester
Burnley
Brighton
Leeds

Worst
Man Utd
Everton
Arsenal
Tottenham

The best clubs perform above their resources, the worst perform well below their resources.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
34,063
Brentford as #1, I'd have thought. Their data-driven approach has seen them go from League 1 to the PL while having a positive net spend in recent years and (barring an implosion) they're going to stay in the PL this year despite having the lowest wage budget.
 

Infra-red

Full Member
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
13,387
Location
left wing
Everton and United both seem to have that "throw a load of mud at the wall and hope something sticks" strategy, that really demonstrates a deep level of incompetency at the heart of those clubs.

At no point do you get the sense that they are in control of their fates - instead they just lurch from one embarrassing episode to another, without ever looking like they have even a semblance of football intelligence guiding the decision making.
 

chiz2kul

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
680
Best: west ham, brighton, chelsea

worst: spurs, everton, watford
 

Mastadon

New Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2017
Messages
769
Supports
Arsenal
Arsenal and United are easily the worst run. Liverpool/Chelsea/City the best. Shout outs to Leicester too.
 

glaspalast

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Jan 11, 2022
Messages
68
Supports
Crystal Palace
Badly run

West Ham. The dildomen have mortgaged the future. The fact is: when an english club doesn't own its own ground, it will, sooner or later, get totally shafted.
Man Utd. The Glaziers are parasites and Woodward is an idiot.
Arsenal: baffling random cocktail of stinginess and extravagance.
Liverpool. Complete idiots who have just got lucky by hiring a good manager and then repeatedly fluking the transfer market *

Better run than posters here think

Burnley
Norwich
They get knocked down, they get up again. Look at the ex Prem clubs floundering around deep in debt in the championship or even lower. That's "badly run"

Not really measurable

Chelsea, Man City, Newcastle


Category Error

Watford
Calling Watford badly run is like accusing an satsuma of being arrogant



*satire
 

cjj

Full Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2017
Messages
697
Supports
Spurs
Quite weird that a few people have put Tottenham in the running for 'worst' run. Less weird that there's no explanation.
Probably the only example of a club that were mid table in the 90s and have been consistently in/around the CL spots despite having no owner investment, and using income to slowly improve the mechanisms to compete with the income/spending of clubs that rely on regular prize/competition pots.
People often misrepresent the stadium cost as "debt", but it's the only other PL club that owns its own stadium that has been built in the last 10 years - bar Brentford, which isn't really a PL capacity stadium (17k).

As much as people might point at "trophies" and all that, bar the odd anomaly, those are now won almost exclusively by two categories of club:
- The oligarchs (City & Chelsea)
- The traditional three (Liverpool, United, Arsenal)

In the last 20 years, a very limited number of trophies have been won by a team not in those groups:
- only 1 league title; the super anomy Leicester in 15/16 (6 season ago already!)
- only 2 FA cups; Leicester last season, Wigan in 12/13, and Pompey in 07/08,
- 5 league cups; Blackburn, Middlesborough, Tottenham, Birmingham, Swansea.

In the last 10 years, since it was suddenly taken more seriously, that number reduces to 1 - Swansea.

It really depends on the definition you're working off, but from the OP: budget, history and expectations?

I'd say that those in the "traditional three" should have the same sort of budget, history and expectations - being within the conversation of the title. I'd not hesitate to put Arsenal down as 'badly run', because the club have regularly released or sold their best players to rivals, almost never made good decisions with selling. In fact, their 2nd highest sale ever is still Anelka in 99/00. The flaw here would be to assume that a club that doesn't sell is a well-run club, but they tend to not do that either to be honest. You can't even accuse the owners of being tight - they've consistently made stupid decisions by signing ageing 'stars' with nothing left to play for, stuck on high wages. They've won trophies, but I feel like that is down to the momentum of prestige, rather than anything suggesting 'well run'. Their net spend, over the past 5 seasons, is in excess of £330m

Next, I'd say Everton. Ironically Moshiri from the Arsenal school of running-clubs-badly, they seem to run their business based on something QPR would have done - overpaying for players that no top-4 club would want, and somehow believing, like most clueless fans, that you can spend £500m (over £220m net) on players and suddenly be "top 4". Great support, for the traditional part, but no clear strategy or direction. Kind of an "all the gear but no idea" sense about how they are run.

Watford speak for themselves. No idea what their strategy is, other than sacking managers is easier than signing players. I don't know what the Pozzo family's intentions are for the club either, except milking PL survival cash.

Despite what others are saying, I'm not sure I'd put Brighton in the conversation as 'well run'. They've spent nearly £200m net, and are quite fortuitous for having Potter, as I'd expect them to be well and truly down without him. If anything, it shows how fickle fans are, because they associate the over-performance of managers with a club being 'well run'. It masks a lot of issues.
 

Fluctuation0161

Full Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
8,156
Location
Manchester
We're not remotely close to being the best run.

We're not incompetently ran but we're far from the best. We have the combination of resources plus academy player's coming through to be fully challenging City but we haven't troubled them in the league for 5 years now.
Yes, but City have unlimited budget beyond any other club. Even including Chelsea.
 

Botim

Full Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2017
Messages
662
Supports
Royal Antwerp FC
Quite weird that a few people have put Tottenham in the running for 'worst' run. Less weird that there's no explanation.
Although I wouldn't say they are badly run, there's definitely a feeling that they always screw up somehow whenever they seem on the brink of establishing themselves as a top club. Let's also not ignore the fact they have won absolutely nothing in the last 10 years, as opposed to Leicester or a very poorly run Arsenal, for example.

Also, what's the plan exactly these last few years?
 

Hansi Fick

New Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
5,057
Supports
FC Bayern
Badly run

West Ham. The dildomen have mortgaged the future. The fact is: when an english club doesn't own its own ground, it will, sooner or later, get totally shafted.
Man Utd. The Glaziers are parasites and Woodward is an idiot.
Arsenal: baffling random cocktail of stinginess and extravagance.
Liverpool. Complete idiots who have just got lucky by hiring a good manager and then repeatedly fluking the transfer market *

Better run than posters here think

Burnley
Norwich
They get knocked down, they get up again. Look at the ex Prem clubs floundering around deep in debt in the championship or even lower. That's "badly run"

Not really measurable

Chelsea, Man City, Newcastle


Category Error

Watford
Calling Watford badly run is like accusing an satsuma of being arrogant



*satire
Good post.
However, the correct form of address is "Dildo Brothers", not "dildomen".