Dyche is still the man for the job without a shadow of doubt.

[Newcastleclaret93]

Add Richardson to that now he’s back fit, although not featured in the past few 23 games which suggests he’s picked up a new knock.

Yes I was going to include Richardson and Mancini but I believe Mancini is coming back from a knock and Richardson has a new one.

[boyyanno]

I have never said he singlehandedly achieved our success.
I have said I believe he is a decisive, in my opinion THE decisive, factor in our success.
I have said I do not believe there is another manager available who could do as good or better a job, given our resources, who we could realistically get.
I acknowledged we made signings in the summer- and that this was still less investment than other clubs and less than our successful period relative to rivals and I believe as an absolute. The fact we spent in 2021 doesn't negate that we spent less than 2019, or (almost) nothing in 2020, or even less relatively than previous.
I have said that I believe this stagnant and declining investment in recruitment over the past 2+ years is the primary problem behind our struggles. Especially as it is declining relative to the demands of our league.
I accept that this is partly forced by wage rises, I have not been condemning the board especially Garlick for this. I will condemn the current board as they have not reversed this investment strategy (ie have still spent less, not more) but have still put the club into debt- the worst of both worlds.
I accept that these declining resources also mean that we are now in a situation where the resources may have declined below what Dyche is capable of succeeding with. However the point is, given his track record and given other clubs' and managers track records at delivering success on tight budgets, I believe that he is still currently the likeliest to deliver success of any managers who are available,, and should he fail to do so in the Championship then this belief and assessment will be re-evaluated.
I am not saying that Dyche is beyond reproach or beyond criticism and certainly not that he is "owed a chance"- it's a sport, you earn, you're not owed. I am saying that regardless of this I believe he is the best candidate available to us ie. We cannot get someone who could do better despite any shortcomings he may have. Someone doesn't have to be perfect to be the best candidate, someone doesn't have to be perfect to not be attributed the blame for our failings, and someone doesn't have to be perfect to be given the greatest credit for our success. It is not a matter of in the middle equal credit and blame as other factors have changed and distort the picture.

The thing is though, in comparison to the rest of the league we have always under invested. Not only that but the team our success was built on comprised of Championship players that were put together on a shoestring budget, and we still stayed up! We have proved its possible when management is good.

The key factor for me is that we have always (under Dyche) been a team that has been better than the sum of it's parts, but this season we have not been. For over 18 months we probably haven't. That's not down to recruitment, we just aren't getting the best out of what we have. Dyche has historically always done that, but he isn't now. I'm happy to accept and I've made the point over the last few years that crappy recruitment would likely catch up with us, but I've watched us over 18 months and we have played better football and stayed up in this division with worse players imo.

5 years ago if we'd have been offered a team that included Cornet, Pope, Weghorst, Tarks, McNeil we would have been in dreamland. The squad is maybe not as good as the one that had Defour in it and a prime Jack Cork but it's no worse than previous sides we have had, and not in comparison to the rest of the league either. We've always had a poor squad in reality, but there are worse teams on paper than us this year, neither Norwich or Everton named particularly strong lineups against us.

I just can't accept after watching us for the last 18 months that recruitment is the only thing to blame I'm afraid, nor that Sean Dyche is the only man on the planet who could successfully manage Burnley FC. I want what's best for the club the same as every fan, and I'm not actually Dyche out, I hope he stays and gets it right. I am willing to accept though that we haven't been good enough and he is a factor of it therfore it's no surprise fans are questioning wether he is the right man to continue, I'm asking myself those same questions.

Question, do you think Sean Dyche has got the best from his players this season? Honestly?

[Conroy92]

There's no such crew, that's a label people like yourself throw around when you can't handle a well thought out and constructed response to your claims.

Works both ways, there's plenty that come on and call the "Dyche out fans" all sorts, mainly ignoring that they have an opinion too and some well constructed.
What is ignored is that nearly every single poster wants the best for the club.
To highlight the reversal, someone stated that most of the negative posts on here must be from Blackburn fans posting! How insulting!

Personally my stance in all this, time for a change. Dyche has done fantastic for us, he's certainly coincided with a time I thought I'd never see watching Burnley and he's obviously been a massive part of it, I thank him for that.
The past two years I've not enjoyed the football as much. I'm just gonna say it. The odd result against big sides have been amazing, look at the win at Old Trafford, but in a lot of cases I believe that results have flattered the heart of our performances for a long period. I'm fickle, I'll say that now, most football fans are. So while we continued to compete and get results, I went along with the football.
I even spoke to friends and family about it, some people happy others too thinking the performances had not been as good. Often I argued for Dyche and that he would adapt it, I argued that better players would fit a system in which could let us get forward more, this is when the recruitment point usually occured, 'Garlick uninvested', 'with investment look what Dyche can do'. The board took a long slog of the blame and I agree with a lot of it. We had two seasons where we didn't invest enough.
Then in the last year, I think better players have entered the side, surely in the likes of Cornet and Weghorst. For balance though, we have also seen some decline and Wood has left of course. I don't think the calibre of the squad has changed much overall. For one of the worst sides in the league as many say, we've a back 5 (including GK) probably only bettered by the top 6-8 clubs. In McNeil out wide we have/had a potential future England international that again a lot of bigger sides wanted (depends who you ask). You've Cornet who was unknown really but has come in and done well and again, must be being looked at by top 10 clubs and we had a proven premier league striker netting ten plus a season in Wood- this was at the start of the season. I think we undersell ourselves at times when we say we have the worst team in the league. The two centre midfielders may be the worst in the league though. Which leads me to three points, why have we not seen changes in formation to counter this, why have we not seen different selections when players are dreadfully out of form, why did we not sign better center midfielders. The manager affects two out of the three of these and he hasn't done that. Very long winded I know but that's one reason for me wanting a change.
There is no sign of adapting anything at the moment, if anything, we are persisting with long ball football despite now having players that in some areas want passes to feet. The new signings don't appear to fit, or we'd be changing round them and currently appear to be square pegs in round holes, it also means McNeil will either be used from the bench or down the right which is another slight disappointment, although his form has been poor. It's another reason that it might be a good time for a change and with a lot of OOC players, it would be a good time to build a new side around our current attacking talents, I'm not sure Dyche can do that.
Final reason for me, it's not just Westwood and age catching up to him in performances, look at McNeil, the lad has bags of talent and ability, something's not right with performances from players, all over the pitch. I'm not sure Dyche is motivating this side to the same level any longer. The words of Chris Wood 'comfort zone' seems to sum up a lot of performances this season.

Love Dyche, love everything he's done, just want a change and feel the time is right!
Whatever happens hopefully we can build up and go again!
UTC.

[Shaggy]

There's no such crew, that's a label people like yourself throw around when you can't handle a well thought out and constructed response to your claims.

There clearly is. As has already been mentioned by several people, you can’t have it both ways with Dyche. He can’t take all the plaudits years none of the criticism.

Anyway with reference to younger players which doesn’t mean promoting from the academy exclusively. Please provide your evidence to suggest Dyche has signed and used up and coming players to develop and evolve into the first team squad?

We know you won’t be able to provide much because that’s not what Dyche does. He signes and uses experienced players, which is a huge inflexibility on Dyche’s part.

I’m certain there was an article out a while ago where a former Leeds united manager mentioned that after a narrow defeat to us that on conversation with Dyche, Sean had stated that he had found a way to win.. to me this was quite revealing. It’s almost as if Dyche has stumbled across a system and will not under any circumstances deviate from it. I think the evidence we have seen from his time here suggests that, which would really indicate that Dyche is tactically very naive or in layman’s terms a one trick pony.

One things for sure, Dyche isn’t the man to turn his drifting/sinking ship around. He’s ran out of ideas a long time ago.

And yes I will look for that said article i mentioned.

[spt_claret]

The thing is though, in comparison to the rest of the league we have always under invested. Not only that but the team our success was built on comprised of Championship players that were put together on a shoestring budget, and we still stayed up! We have proved its possible when management is good.

The key factor for me is that we have always (under Dyche) been a team that has been better than the sum of it's parts, but this season we have not been. For over 18 months we probably haven't. That's not down to recruitment, we just aren't getting the best out of what we have. Dyche has historically always done that, but he isn't now. I'm happy to accept and I've made the point over the last few years that crappy recruitment would likely catch up with us, but I've watched us over 18 months and we have played better football and stayed up in this division with worse players imo.

5 years ago if we'd have been offered a team that included Cornet, Pope, Weghorst, Tarks, McNeil we would have been in dreamland. The squad is maybe not as good as the one that had Defour in it and a prime Jack Cork but it's no worse than previous sides we have had, and not in comparison to the rest of the league either. We've always had a poor squad in reality, but there are worse teams on paper than us this year, neither Norwich or Everton named particularly strong lineups against us.

I just can't accept after watching us for the last 18 months that recruitment is the only thing to blame I'm afraid, nor that Sean Dyche is the only man on the planet who could successfully manage Burnley FC. I want what's best for the club the same as every fan, and I'm not actually Dyche out, I hope he stays and gets it right. I am willing to accept though that we haven't been good enough and he is a factor of it therfore it's no surprise fans are questioning wether he is the right man to continue, I'm asking myself those same questions.

Question, do you think Sean Dyche has got the best from his players this season? Honestly?

Yes. And that absolute and comparative under investment has gotten worse.
You say you accept that poor recruitment catches up but when someone is arguing that you're insisting "That's not down to recruitment, we just aren't getting the best out of what we have".
5 years ago a number of our key players were also younger and had more in the tank. This isn't a worse squad, I agree- but I disagree about it being worse in comparison because again, our recruitment has not kept pace.
Everton's squad is leagues above ours. We beat the admittedly weak lineup they put out, and we massively underperformed against Norwich, but any of Richarlison, Calvert-Lewin, Alli, Doucoure, Demarai Gray, Allan, would make our first XI, possibly Delph or Tom Davies, on his day Townsend. Our defence is better than theirs, that's the only unit of the pitch I'd say we're stronger in.
No I don't think Dyche has got the best from all of his players this season, but I think that is in part due to players declining because again, we haven't recruited to replace naturally aging players, some of whom (Westwood especially) have been overperforming for a few years. I'd say he's got the best out of Cornet given his record compared to before Burnley, the most out of Tarkowski, over-performing out of Lennon given his renaissance, possibly out of Rodriguez in the last few games. Definitely not out of McNeil or Weghorst, probably not out of Mee or Pope unusually. Midfield I honestly think it's just down to Brownhill not being good enough, and Westwood declining after having over-performed. Taylor & Pieters have been repeatedly injured so its hard to say- I'd say probably got the most out of Pieters, not out of Taylor. Roberts had a long layoff unwell so it's hard to identify the cause for his underperformance, Lowton I think was intended as backup this year and has probably done as well as you could expect. I think the majority of the players have settled down to expected performance levels after a few years over-performing, 1 or 2 over-performing, a handful under-performing some of which there's possible fitness factors. I remember a few years ago people thinking Barnes and a 19-year old McNeil should play for England- if that doesn't scream over-performing I don't know what does. We're not over-performing now as a team, that's for certain.
This does not change my view that I think Dyche remains the best option available to us given all factors. Saying that he's the best option is not the same thing as saying he's "the only man who can manage us", that's an asinine comparison. Every appointment ever made at managerial level is what you judge to be the best option- that doesn't mean you're saying they're perfect or the only man and you really have to stop putting words in people's mouths and making such hyperbolic reductions.
Dyche is not perfect. Dyche makes mistakes. But for now, I believe that he remains the best option available to us- not a messiah, not the only person who can manage Burnley FC< not bigger than the club- the best option realistically available, factoring in everything. And if we are relegated and off the pace for promotion, then yes, I would reassess and conclude it's time for a change. Right now, I don't believe it is. It really is as simple as that.

Genuinely laughing now. So you think a mixture of the two sides would have kept us up? But your banging the drum all over the thread that it's not possible for a small team like us to stop in this division? Which one is it?! Another poster rightly calls you out for having your cake and eating it too.

I have never said "it's not possible for a small team like us to stop up". I have said stagnant and declining recruitment has naturally caused our team to decline, especially relative to teams around us, so it is absolutely no surprise we are in the situation we are in regardless of who is manager.
Barton and Defour at their best were better than our current CMs are right now. Barnes at his best was a handful who offered more than Rodriguez or (currently) Weghorst right now. But Barton left, Defour's injuries caught up and he left, Barnes' injuries and age caught up and he declined, just as with Cork, just as with Westwood's decline. Of course if you assemble a team of the best players you've had over 5 years, assuming they're all at their peak, you do better. Christ, extend that to 10 years and we get Trippier, Keane, Austin, Ings, Heaton in their prime to pick from as well.
I keep making the point that the team has declined in large part due to declining investment meaning we have struggled to a) refresh naturally declining players and b) keep pace with the other teams constantly spending & moving forwards. You cannot actually be trying to play a gotcha over someone saying "A dream team of our last 5 years in their prime would do better than the current team", unless you actually believe this current Burnley side is the greatest possible XI we've had in that time. And I can't believe that you actually think we would be doing no better with those 3 in their prime. That was my whole point- funds and recruitment mean we have declined in a few key areas. What part of "our team has declined, arguably on absolute measures and certainly relative to our rivals, because we've not had the funds to recruit replacements or improvements" don't you get? Or do you seriously think that Barton & Defour as they were in 2016-17 wouldn't get in our current team and Cork would still be playing for England without Dyche?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

There clearly is. As has already been mentioned by several people, you can’t have it both ways with Dyche. He can’t take all the plaudits years none of the criticism.

Anyway with reference to younger players which doesn’t mean promoting from the academy exclusively. Please provide your evidence to suggest Dyche has signed and used up and coming players to develop and evolve into the first team squad?

We know you won’t be able to provide much because that’s not what Dyche does. He signes and uses experienced players, which is a huge inflexibility on Dyche’s part.

I’m certain there was an article out a while ago where a former Leeds united manager mentioned that after a narrow defeat to us that on conversation with Dyche, Sean had stated that he had found a way to win.. to me this was quite revealing. It’s almost as if Dyche has stumbled across a system and will not under any circumstances deviate from it. I think the evidence we have seen from his time here suggests that, which would really indicate that Dyche is tactically very naive or in layman’s terms a one trick pony.

One things for sure, Dyche isn’t the man to turn his drifting/sinking ship around. He’s ran out of ideas a long time ago.

And yes I will look for that said article i mentioned.

I don't want it both ways with Dyche, I just can't understand those who've taken a narrow view and lump all the blame on him without considering extenuating circumstances.

So now you want to move the goalposts away from the academy and narrow it down again to signing young players to develop and merge into the first team squad?
Are you going to give me an age limit too?

Charlie Taylor was 23 when he came, or isn't that young enough?
What about Collins?
Or will you move the goalposts and claim it's not a Dyche approved signing?
Nick Pope was 22-23 when he signed.
Michael Keane 21-22 when he came.
Andre Gray was also 22-23
He tried the likes of Bamford, Nkoudou, Chalobah etc on loan and they didn't work out for whatever reason and that reason will depend on what agenda you're pushing, but they were all younger lads with potential, one has fulfilled his in the PL eventually, one moved abroad to play in Turkey but is doing better there than he ever did in the PL and the other has spent the last two seasons in the championship which looks like his level, so they've all had mixed careers after being with us.

Tell me more about how I won't be able to provide anything....

Come on, set some parameters because right now I'm giving examples of younger players he's signed and merged into the squad and others he's signed on loan and tried out.

Dyche's remit has always been keep us up and if he found a system to do that, what's the issue?
He's proven he can build a team that plays reasonably good football, as shown when we finished 7th.

He tends to sign a mixture of younger players along with older pros because he values the experience he gets from the older lads and they help ensure there is no unrest in the dressing room and to date there has been no reports of unrest in there during his time here, despite what the body language experts on here claim from time to time

Has Dyche ran out of ideas?
No, I don't think he has, but he's having to work with what he's got and to a degree that will limit him.

Could he be more flexible?
Yes I think he could, but again he's limited in what he's got and we don't know how much effort he puts into trying new formations on the training ground, but I'm reasonably sure if he tried something very different and we got battered, the experts on here wouldn't be happy and demand to know why he'd changed, so rock and a hard place for Dyche.

[spt_claret]

I don't want it both ways with Dyche, I just can't understand those who've taken a narrow view and lump all the blame on him without considering extenuating circumstances.

So now you want to move the goalposts away from the academy and narrow it down again to signing young players to develop and merge into the first team squad?
Are you going to give me an age limit too?

Charlie Taylor was 23 when he came, or isn't that young enough?
What about Collins?
Or will you move the goalposts and claim it's not a Dyche approved signing?
Nick Pope was 22-23 when he signed.
Michael Keane 21-22 when he came.
Andre Gray was also 22-23
He tried the likes of Bamford, Nkoudou, Chalobah etc on loan and they didn't work out for whatever reason and that reason will depend on what agenda you're pushing, but they were all younger lads with potential, one has fulfilled his in the PL eventually, one moved abroad to play in Turkey but is doing better there than he ever did in the PL and the other has spent the last two seasons in the championship which looks like his level, so they've all had mixed careers after being with us.

Tell me more about how I won't be able to provide anything....

Come on, set some parameters because right now I'm giving examples of younger players he's signed and merged into the squad and others he's signed on loan and tried out.

Dyche's remit has always been keep us up and if he found a system to do that, what's the issue?
He's proven he can build a team that plays reasonably good football, as shown when we finished 7th.

He tends to sign a mixture of younger players along with older pros because he values the experience he gets from the older lads and they help ensure there is no unrest in the dressing room and to date there has been no reports of unrest in there during his time here, despite what the body language experts on here claim from time to time

Has Dyche ran out of ideas?
No, I don't think he has, but he's having to work with what he's got and to a degree that will limit him.

Could he be more flexible?
Yes I think he could, but again he's limited in what he's got and we don't know how much effort he puts into trying new formations on the training ground, but I'm reasonably sure if he tried something very different and we got battered, the experts on here wouldn't be happy and demand to know why he'd changed, so rock and a hard place for Dyche.

You're wasting your breath. People don't accept that "The best option we have available for manager" isn't the same as saying "Infallible god-king who is always perfect". Or that pointing to stagnant budgets and shrinking recruitment as the decisive reason for our on-pitch problems isn't the same as demanding huge numbers of first team players every window. Even though they will then be the first to ask why we didn't just sign Conor Gallagher and Christian Eriksen.
People got very messed up by the Owen Coyle Is God phase, and the world in general is going evermore all-or-nothing. Dyche has to be sacked or you're saying he's flawless. No other options.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

You're wasting your breath. People don't accept that "The best option we have available for manager" isn't the same as saying "Infallible god-king who is always perfect". Or that pointing to stagnant budgets and shrinking recruitment as the decisive reason for our on-pitch problems isn't the same as demanding huge numbers of first team players every window. Even though they will then be the first to ask why we didn't just sign Conor Gallagher and Christian Eriksen.
People got very messed up by the Owen Coyle Is God phase, and the world in general is going evermore all-or-nothing. Dyche has to be sacked or you're saying he's flawless. No other options.

People forget that the top clubs demand their loaned out players get X amount of playing time.
Interestingly Daniel Farke, formerly of Norwich, stated that it isn't the job of Norwich to help develop players from other clubs and that he'd chose Norwich players over loanees, so signing Gilmour seemed fairly daft and also as either you or someone else stated further up, some loan signings require a complete change to a clubs style.
There's a belief that Gilmour was never going to suit Norwich's style under Farke and I think that was proven to be correct because he's more of a stylish/Flair footballer than a get stuck in type.

[Shaggy]

I don't want it both ways with Dyche, I just can't understand those who've taken a narrow view and lump all the blame on him without considering extenuating circumstances.

No what you are trying to do is use the circumstances with the takeover to relieve Dyche from most of the blame to our current situation. Whilst the investment hasn’t been fantastic how do you know it’s purely down to the board( we are talking Garlic here ). Did the recruitment team perhaps present Dyche with a list of attainable targets who he rejected for one reason or another? Who then decided he would rather keep the old boys brigade? It’s not like there hasn’t been opportunities to move on some of our star players to provide funds either, like Tarkowski for
Instance.

So now you want to move the goalposts away from the academy and narrow it down again to signing young players to develop and merge into the first team squad?
Are you going to give me an age limit too?

Who said im moving the goalposts? Signing and using younger players isn’t exclusively related to the academy players, it’s pretty straightforward.

Charlie Taylor was 23 when he came, or isn't that young enough?
What about Collins?
Or will you move the goalposts and claim it's not a Dyche approved signing?
Nick Pope was 22-23 when he signed.
Michael Keane 21-22 when he came.
Andre Gray was also 22-23
He tried the likes of Bamford, Nkoudou, Chalobah etc on loan and they didn't work out for whatever reason and that reason will depend on what agenda you're pushing, but they were all younger lads with potential, one has fulfilled his in the PL eventually, one moved abroad to play in Turkey but is doing better there than he ever did in the PL and the other has spent the last two seasons in the championship which looks like his level, so they've all had mixed careers after being with us.

Absolutely correct that’s the type of players we should have been signing every other season as a minimum to keep the squad fresh. Keane and Gray moved on for good profit and that should be our model. Why have we abandoned that? Why have we not seen more of these type of signings? Nearly 10 years Dyche has been here not exactly a stellar record is it over that time.

Regarding loans, clearly pointless under Dyche as he doesn’t change a team or rotate. The loans were clearly used as cover, perhaps no one will loan Dyche any player just to sit in the bench.

Tell me more about how I won't be able to provide anything....

Come on, set some parameters because right now I'm giving examples of younger players he's signed and merged into the squad and others he's signed on loan and tried out.

Dyche's remit has always been keep us up and if he found a system to do that, what's the issue?
He's proven he can build a team that plays reasonably good football, as shown when we finished 7th.

The parameters are fairly simple, the signing of young players to develop and sell on for a profit if/when the opportunity arises.

Would you say that Dyches transfer dealings have been good? Poor or indifferent?

It’s almost like Dyche is scared of failure or at least being blamed for the failure. We
Certainly do not play reasonably good football under Dyche. Even in that season we finished 7th. Successful results do mask
Poor football. Right now is probably the worst football I have seen from a Burnley team in the last 30 years. It’s a dull experience.

He tends to sign a mixture of younger players along with older pros because he values the experience he gets from the older lads and they help ensure there is no unrest in the dressing room and to date there has been no reports of unrest in there during his time here, despite what the body language experts on here claim from time to time

Has Dyche ran out of ideas?
No, I don't think he has, but he's having to work with what he's got and to a degree that will limit him.

Could he be more flexible?
Yes I think he could, but again he's limited in what he's got and we don't know how much effort he puts into trying new formations on the training ground, but I'm reasonably sure if he tried something very different and we got battered, the experts on here wouldn't be happy and demand to know why he'd changed, so rock and a hard place for Dyche.

I disagree, over the past near 10 years the favourite go to has been towards to older experiences end of the scale. We are the oldest squad in the division.

There’s no question Dyche has ran out of ideas, we are doing the same things time and time again with the worst form in the football pyramid. The last 18 months has been the same. Why no change? He’s had plenty of opportunities to change
Things up. Why not?

Sorry but after near 10 years we haven’t changed or evolved in any shape or form. It’s the same time and time again. The fact
We don’t have any alternatives to a rigid 4-4-2 is beyond a tactical failure. Most fans could name the starting line up for the next match and when the first substitution will be and who will be taken off. That’s how rigid and predictable we are.

It’s like Dyche is playing a martingale system
And we are now at the higher end of the scale where there isn’t enough chips to continue and it all falls down.

[RVclaret]

You're wasting your breath. People don't accept that "The best option we have available for manager" isn't the same as saying "Infallible god-king who is always perfect". Or that pointing to stagnant budgets and shrinking recruitment as the decisive reason for our on-pitch problems isn't the same as demanding huge numbers of first team players every window. Even though they will then be the first to ask why we didn't just sign Conor Gallagher and Christian Eriksen.
People got very messed up by the Owen Coyle Is God phase, and the world in general is going evermore all-or-nothing. Dyche has to be sacked or you're saying he's flawless. No other options.

How do you possibly know he’s the best we could get? Did anyone at all expect him to do as well as he has before appointed? How would you know manager X or Y couldn’t take it on like Marsch has at Leeds and perform?

How many transfer targets may we have missed out on because players don’t want to play our known rigid defensive style? You can talk about stagnant budgets and us not being able to afford loans (got no idea why) but again fail to put any blame on the manager.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

No what you are trying to do is use the circumstances with the takeover to relieve Dyche from most of the blame to our current situation. Whilst the investment hasn’t been fantastic how do you know it’s purely down to the board( we are talking Garlic here ). Did the recruitment team perhaps present Dyche with a list of attainable targets who he rejected for one reason or another? Who then decided he would rather keep the old boys brigade? It’s not like there hasn’t been opportunities to move on some of our star players to provide funds either, like Tarkowski for
Instance.




Who said im moving the goalposts? Signing and using younger players isn’t exclusively related to the academy players, it’s pretty straightforward.



Absolutely correct that’s the type of players we should have been signing every other season as a minimum to keep the squad fresh. Keane and Gray moved on for good profit and that should be our model. Why have we abandoned that? Why have we not seen more of these type of signings? Nearly 10 years Dyche has been here not exactly a stellar record is it over that time.

Regarding loans, clearly pointless under Dyche as he doesn’t change a team or rotate. The loans were clearly used as cover, perhaps no one will loan Dyche any player just to sit in the bench.



The parameters are fairly simple, the signing of young players to develop and sell on for a profit if/when the opportunity arises.

Would you say that Dyches transfer dealings have been good? Poor or indifferent?

It’s almost like Dyche is scared of failure or at least being blamed for the failure. We
Certainly do not play reasonably good football under Dyche. Even in that season we finished 7th. Successful results do mask
Poor football. Right now is probably the worst football I have seen from a Burnley team in the last 30 years. It’s a dull experience.



I disagree, over the past near 10 years the favourite go to has been towards to older experiences end of the scale. We are the oldest squad in the division.

There’s no question Dyche has ran out of ideas, we are doing the same things time and time again with the worst form in the football pyramid. The last 18 months has been the same. Why no change? He’s had plenty of opportunities to change
Things up. Why not?

Sorry but after near 10 years we haven’t changed or evolved in any shape or form. It’s the same time and time again. The fact
We don’t have any alternatives to a rigid 4-4-2 is beyond a tactical failure. Most fans could name the starting line up for the next match and when the first substitution will be and who will be taken off. That’s how rigid and predictable we are.

It’s like Dyche is playing a martingale system
And we are now at the higher end of the scale where there isn’t enough chips to continue and it all falls down.

Let's try again.
He isn't clear of any blame, nor is he entirely at fault as some of you try to claim.

We had a pandemic, stop start season, TV rebates etc, all of which hindered recruitment, but we can't mention that because it doesn't suit your narrative and we can use extenuating circumstances.

Your comment about loans is laughable, maybe I should consider whizzing into the wind instead of carrying this debate with you

Dyche's first priority is survival and doing it within the budget he's been given each year, which he's managed to do and also during that time 2 top ten finishes which several other clubs with bigger budgets have failed to do.

Yes we have evolved, we're no longer a primarily championship team incase you hadn't noticed, or isn't that considered an evolution?

So you've decided we've never played reasonably good football, ever, under Dyche....yeah I'm gonna go whizz into the wind, it's Definitely going to be more productive than wasting my time with you.

Have fun screaming into the void about your hatred of all things Dyche.

[spt_claret]

No what you are trying to do is use the circumstances with the takeover to relieve Dyche from most of the blame to our current situation. Whilst the investment hasn’t been fantastic how do you know it’s purely down to the board( we are talking Garlic here ). Did the recruitment team perhaps present Dyche with a list of attainable targets who he rejected for one reason or another? Who then decided he would rather keep the old boys brigade? It’s not like there hasn’t been opportunities to move on some of our star players to provide funds either, like Tarkowski for
Instance.

Arguments require supportive evidence. "How do you know the board didn't offer him XYZ to sign who he rejected" (with the inherent assumption rejection is wrong and XYZ would improve us) is utterly unsubstantiated. You could just as easily say "How do you know Dyche didn't personally headhunt every single player, negotiate every aspect of the transfer and wages, set up the payments, print the contract and drive the player to the Turf himself?" You see how stupid that is? You see how lacking in any basis that is?
If your argument is we had all these signings lined up that Dyche rejected, and all the available funds for these rejected signings went unused, it's on you to provide something to substantiate it. Otherwise we can argue any hypothetical and say that Dyche had *insert player of your choice* personally agreeing terms until the board said "Ooh no we don't need to spend to sign him we've got Ashley Barnes". If you're thinking that's a dumb argument, congratulations, that's the point.
Also, we're talking Pace, not just Garlick. The investment issue has continued- some investment arrived this past summer, less than summer 2019 (the last summer in which Garlick invested). And this is the thing- a lot of people aren't even saying "Why didn't the skinflint board just give him £60m"- they're saying that our investment (for WHATEVER reason, rightly or wrongly, prudence, mismanagement, greed, caution, lack of resources you name it and I happen to go with lack of resources, I'm not even attacking the board) has been insufficient to keep pace with other teams.

Absolutely correct that’s the type of players we should have been signing every other season as a minimum to keep the squad fresh. Keane and Gray moved on for good profit and that should be our model. Why have we abandoned that? Why have we not seen more of these type of signings? Nearly 10 years Dyche has been here not exactly a stellar record is it over that time.

Abandoned? We just signed a 24, 25 and 20 year old this past summer- and no this is NOT inconsistent with saying we aren't signing enough or investing enough, it still wasn't enough given we haven't strengthened central midfield or deepened our wing options. Believing "we've signed some players who are a decent profile" isn't the same as believing we've signed enough to offset years of under-investment, especially when our spend has still been so low relative even to our own past seasons.

Regarding loans, clearly pointless under Dyche as he doesn’t change a team or rotate. The loans were clearly used as cover, perhaps no one will loan Dyche any player just to sit in the bench.

Think there's some truth in this in that we're unlikely to explore the loan market much and unlikely to be loaned players much. Don't know how much of that is down to Dyche, certainly some of it is. But loans are a gamble, and by their very nature a temporary stopgap not a longterm solution. I'd like us to utilise the loan market more, no arguments. But I implore you to look at the financials Chester Perry keeps posting- we'd have to make a wage contribution for loans, it's cheaper than buying a plyer but not as simple as an extra freebie player, so there is an opportunity cost to a loan in terms of wage budget, and playing time to permanent players, in addition to the risk that an unproven or non-first-team player of another club might not be good enough. In the Championship, a loan from a Premier League club is far less of a risk as the competition standard is different, and given our finances I would really hope us to dip into the loan market if we go down. If we don't, I think that's a missed opportunity- but it remains a temporary solution given it's a loan.

It’s almost like Dyche is scared of failure or at least being blamed for the failure. We
Certainly do not play reasonably good football under Dyche. Even in that season we finished 7th. Successful results do mask
Poor football. Right now is probably the worst football I have seen from a Burnley team in the last 30 years. It’s a dull experience.

It's not even the worst football we've played in the last 15, nevermind 30. Cotterill was often dire stuff, but a necessity given what we had to work with. Then there was Brian Laws, who I think got a bit of a raw deal of it, but was dreadful in the Premier League aside from the Spurs win.
As for fearing failure, are you aware of Game Theory? A common doctrine in Game Theory is to set out to not lose, and Game Theory is exceptionally useful in all manners of work. The merit of applying it to football is debateable, and I'm not even suggesting Dyche is doing so- just that the starting point of "aim to not lose" is a good one in many purposes.

There’s no question Dyche has ran out of ideas, we are doing the same things time and time again with the worst form in the football pyramid. The last 18 months has been the same. Why no change? He’s had plenty of opportunities to change
Things up. Why not?

Sorry but after near 10 years we haven’t changed or evolved in any shape or form. It’s the same time and time again. The fact
We don’t have any alternatives to a rigid 4-4-2 is beyond a tactical failure. Most fans could name the starting line up for the next match and when the first substitution will be and who will be taken off. That’s how rigid and predictable we are.

We've rotated the right back twice this season- Lowton to Roberts then back. We've rotated McNeil and Cornet. We made early subs against Norwich and Everton. We played 4-4-1-1 with Hendrick behind the striker. We've played 4-4-1-1 with Cornet off the shoulder. Cornet has played left wing and right wing, as has McNeil, as has Gudmundsson. Hendrick played RM on a couple of occasions. We've played or switched to 4-3-3 - we did it vs Chelsea earlier in the season to nab a draw and one of my criticisms of Dyche at the time was we didn't then persist with that. We've done it a couple of times since, sometimes playing attackers wide, sometimes with 3 strikers. Sometimes with McNeil moving to central midfield.
You can argue that he doesn't rotate things enough (I agree). You can argue that he can be too slow in subs (I agree). You can argue that he can be too loyal to certain players (I agree). You can argue that he has a tendency to revert to familiarity (I agree but I also think there's a logic to it, in terms of trying to maximise the most out of players and again, set out to not lose). He's not without flaws because no manager is.But to say "He never changes tactics or substitutes or formations" is factually untrue. You can say he doesn't do it enough, and you have a point. I don't think that flaw means he needs sacking, but I would agree it's a flaw. But don't start exaggerating into things that aren't true.

How do you possibly know he’s the best we could get? Did anyone at all expect him to do as well as he has before appointed? How would you know manager X or Y couldn’t take it on like Marsch has at Leeds and perform?

How many transfer targets may we have missed out on because players don’t want to play our known rigid defensive style? You can talk about stagnant budgets and us not being able to afford loans (got no idea why) but again fail to put any blame on the manager.

I've said countless times I'm not saying it's impossible. I'm talking balance of probability. On the balance of probability it is FAR more liekly that we would replace him with someone worse than unearth a gem. I've outlined my reasons why I believe this to be the case countless times and you just keep refusing to listen or go "But how do you know". I keep saying probability and believe. Not 'know'.
Your hypothetical is impossible to answer because it's a hypothetical. I can just as easily ask "How do you know Dyche didn't have 5 top players clamouring to join us but the board felt it was unnecessary'. It's a worthless question. I'm not interested in 'how do you know' and 'what if' I'm talking assessments on the balance of probability based on available evidence. Of course it is hypothetically theoretically possible that we would unearth the next Guardiola and rebound with a record points tally and become comfortable in the PL playing dazzling football. Based on precedent and available evidence I judge the probability of that to be so low as to be almost neglible, and certainly not worth the risk, as I judge the probability of that failing and resulting in a worse outcome than keeping Dyche to be far higher and indeed likely.
You're utterly exhausting and deeply dishonest in your arguments. I've repeatedly said I don't believe Dyche to be perfect. You keep equating my assessment on probability that he's the best we can get and worth sticking with, to something I have repeatedly clarified I am not arguing- countless times now. What is the point of this? Are you trying to antagonise me into giving up? Into saying something that you can pretend is a gotcha? Into being forced to clarify and reiterate my position so many times that you can pretend I've changed my argument or agreed with you because I've made a criticism of Dyche and therefore that's proof he's not the best option and must go (again, as if it's perfection or rejection)? You have no desire to even hear what people are saying.

[KRBFC]

Pointing towards game time given to Chalobah and Bamford to highlight how Dyche loves to incorporate young players is ******* hilariously ignorant, either you’re simply trolling or you don’t know better...

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Pointing towards game time given to Chalobah and Bamford to highlight how Dyche loves to incorporate young players is ******* hilariously ignorant, either you’re simply trolling or you don’t know better...

I pointed out that he's actually had young loan players and tried to use them, depsite claims to the contrary and then I highlighted how 2 of those 3 ultimately didn't manage to stay in the PL and the other took a while to find his feet.
That you cannot comprehend that just highlights your lack of understanding of what's being discussed, so maybe next time don't bother trying to mock me when you're just showing yourself up instead.

[KRBFC]

I pointed out that he's actually had young loan players and tried to use them, depsite claims to the contrary and then I highlighted how 2 of those 3 ultimately didn't manage to stay in the PL and the other took a while to find his feet.
That you cannot comprehend that just highlights your lack of understanding of what's being discussed, so maybe next time don't bother trying to mock me when you're just showing yourself up instead.

You’re just uneducated, both of those were simply here for cover because we were short in those areas, neither were ever given a fair chance. They are examples of Dyches reluctance to use young players if anything, not the opposite.

[KRBFC]

Bamford played 35 minutes of football here in 5 months and wasn’t injured

[GodIsADeeJay81]

You’re just uneducated, both of those were simply here for cover because we were short in those areas, neither were ever given a fair chance. They are examples of Dyches reluctance to use young players if anything, not the opposite.

So all clubs loan players just because they're short of numbers?
Or are you only applying this claim to Burnley?

Bamford - 2016-17 season
6 appearances in the league for us, 8 for Boro.
Hardly set the world alight at either place and maybe wasn't given much chance at either club, but he was competing against Vokes (10 goals), Gray (9) and Barnes (6) during his half season here so who were you going to drop for him?

Chalobah - we had him here for 6mths, that was the duration of his loan and then he dropped into the championship for the 2nd half of the season, which is where he is now many years later.
Did we give him a fair chance?
Maybe not, but the following season he spent it at Napoli and played even less for the entire season but that doesn't matter because it's not with us.

N'Koudou - another half season loan and he'd spent the first half parked on the bench at Spurs.
He got more game time than the other two, but didn't set the world alight, then spent a year or two floating around not doing a lot before ending up in Turkey and settling down.

So Dyche has tried young loan players in the past and unfortunately they can't all be like Michael Keane for us, that's the risk all clubs take in the loan market.

You make claims that you know so much about football, but for some reason you're in a real blind spot with this one.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Bamford played 35 minutes of football here in 5 months and wasn’t injured

See my other comment and tell me who you're dropping for Bamford.
I look forward to your detailed and clearly expert analysis explaining which of our permanent strikers were being dropped for Bamford.

That won't take you long will it?

[KRBFC]

So all clubs loan players just because they're short of numbers?
Or are you only applying this claim to Burnley?

You’re waffling here mate, for the record I never said Dyche was reluctant to use loan players or young players just that your example of Dyche being willing to use loan youngsters and pointing towards the 35 minutes Bamford played here in 6 months as proof was incredibly stupid. You just said yourself Chalobah wasn’t given a crack, then went rambling about Michael Keane and Nkoudou, two players I never mentioned.

Clubs loan for a variety of reasons including lack of cover, us included. In the case of Bamford particularly he was loaned as cover due to injury problems we had upfront when he came in and I believe Gray was awaiting a suspension for his homophobic tweets.

God you’re so defensive it’s incredible, we are talking about Bamford and Chalobahs loans here, you’ve somehow tried to put words into my mouth and how Burnley use the loan market every deal, you’ve mentioned half of the clubs in Europe and players never mentioned.

Just admit those were 2 poor examples of Dyche giving game time to youngsters and move on, if anything it was proving the opposite.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

You’re waffling here mate, for the record I never said Dyche was reluctant to use loan players or young players just that your example of Dyche being willing to use loan youngsters and pointing towards the 35 minutes Bamford played here in 6 months as proof was incredibly stupid. You just said yourself Chalobah wasn’t given a crack, then went rambling about Michael Keane and Nkoudou, two players I never mentioned.

Clubs loan for a variety of reasons including lack of cover, us included. In the case of Bamford particularly he was loaned as cover due to injury problems we had upfront when he came in and I believe Gray was awaiting a suspension for his homophobic tweets.

God you’re so defensive it’s incredible, we are talking about Bamford and Chalobahs loans here, you’ve somehow tried to put words into my mouth and how Burnley use the loan market every deal, you’ve mentioned half of the clubs in Europe and players never mentioned.

Just admit those were 2 poor examples of Dyche giving game time to youngsters and move on, if anything it was proving the opposite.

I used the 3 players I'd previously referenced when chatting to someone else and added Keane as proof of a successful loan because it was a valid reference to use.

I've used the players career after Burnley to show that they took time to mature and then finally settle at a level that suits them, two below where we are now.

The problem is you focus just on their time here, I look at the bigger picture but because that doesn't suit your agenda you decide it's waffle, but that's not a shock going off your past form.

If using facts, figures and a bigger picture during a debate is waffle to you then maybe next time don't bother engaging with me.

[KRBFC]

I used the 3 players I'd previously referenced when chatting to someone else and added Keane as proof of a successful loan because it was a valid reference to use.

I've used the players career after Burnley to show that they took time to mature and then finally settle at a level that suits them, two below where we are now.

The problem is you focus just on their time here, I look at the bigger picture but because that doesn't suit your agenda you decide it's waffle, but that's not a shock going off your past form.

If using facts, figures and a bigger picture during a debate is waffle to you then maybe next time don't bother engaging with me.

You pointed towards Bamford and Chalobah's game time here as proof Dyche is willing to use youngsters so of course I'm looking at their time here...

I didn't say they were good enough/ready to play, I don't care if they're now playing in Narnia. Instead of tittle tattle, just admit you used 2 poor examples and move on. Michael Keane would have been a very good example, Bamford and Chalobah the worst possible examples.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

You pointed towards Bamford and Chalobah's game time here as proof Dyche is willing to use youngsters so of course I'm looking at their time here...

I didn't say they were good enough/ready to play, I don't care if they're now playing in Narnia. Instead of tittle tattle, just admit you used 2 poor examples and move on. Michael Keane would have been a very good example, Bamford and Chalobah the worst possible examples.

Poor or not, why would I exclude players that have been used, it doesn't make sense?

The whole point was he's tried loans.

You've still yet to tell me who'd you'd drop that season for Bamford, so come on Mr football expert, anytime you're ready.....

[KRBFC]

Poor or not, why would I exclude players that have been used, it doesn't make sense?

The whole point was he's tried loans.

You've still yet to tell me who'd you'd drop that season for Bamford, so come on Mr football expert, anytime you're ready.....

''I didn't say they were good enough/ready to play'' just that using Chalobah and Bamford as ''look Dyche does use young loan players'' was incredibly uneducated given how little they were infact used.

[KRBFC]

I don't understand what is so difficult about admitting you were wrong and those were bad examples, you seem intent on just dragging it on longer and longer by bringing up further unnecessary points I never argued against.

[Newcastleclaret93]

Poor or not, why would I exclude players that have been used, it doesn't make sense?

The whole point was he's tried loans.

You've still yet to tell me who'd you'd drop that season for Bamford, so come on Mr football expert, anytime you're ready.....

I don’t get this argument? What has Dyche used 4-5 loan signings in how ever many years. It’s next to nothing. Even the loan signings he had were only used when everyone else was injured.

I don’t get what your point is?

[GodIsADeeJay81]

I don't understand what is so difficult about admitting you were wrong and those were bad examples, you seem intent on just dragging it on longer and longer by bringing up further unnecessary points I never argued against.

I provided the whole picture, a balanced view so to speak, and you launched yourself in trying to mock me for it
I'm still waiting for your expert view as to who you would've dropped for Bamford.
Do I need to wait long?

When I'm wrong I'll admit it, but as yet...

[ClaretPete001]

The thing is though, in comparison to the rest of the league we have always under invested. Not only that but the team our success was built on comprised of Championship players that were put together on a shoestring budget, and we still stayed up! We have proved its possible when management is good.

The key factor for me is that we have always (under Dyche) been a team that has been better than the sum of it's parts, but this season we have not been. For over 18 months we probably haven't. That's not down to recruitment, we just aren't getting the best out of what we have. Dyche has historically always done that, but he isn't now. I'm happy to accept and I've made the point over the last few years that crappy recruitment would likely catch up with us, but I've watched us over 18 months and we have played better football and stayed up in this division with worse players imo.

5 years ago if we'd have been offered a team that included Cornet, Pope, Weghorst, Tarks, McNeil we would have been in dreamland. The squad is maybe not as good as the one that had Defour in it and a prime Jack Cork but it's no worse than previous sides we have had, and not in comparison to the rest of the league either. We've always had a poor squad in reality, but there are worse teams on paper than us this year, neither Norwich or Everton named particularly strong lineups against us.

I just can't accept after watching us for the last 18 months that recruitment is the only thing to blame I'm afraid, nor that Sean Dyche is the only man on the planet who could successfully manage Burnley FC. I want what's best for the club the same as every fan, and I'm not actually Dyche out, I hope he stays and gets it right. I am willing to accept though that we haven't been good enough and he is a factor of it therfore it's no surprise fans are questioning wether he is the right man to continue, I'm asking myself those same questions.

Question, do you think Sean Dyche has got the best from his players this season? Honestly?

I realise that you've moved the goalposts forward 1 year but in 2016/17 Pope, Tarks and Mc Neil were all in the squad. Tarks was kept out by England player Keane and Pope was kept out be England player Heaton.

George Boyd was topping the yards covered charts and JBG was a real quality player unlike the shadow he is now.

At this point, I wouldn't play Weghorst in front of Vokes, Barnes or Gray (all in the 2016/17) squad. Vokes scored 10 goals in 21 games (many as sub) that season. Barnes scored 6 in 20 and Gray scored 9 in 26.

In 2017/18, We added Wood, Cork, and Taylor. In that season, Wood scored 10 in 20 (1 in 2) and Barnes scored 9 in 21; scoring rates that puts them in the highest bracket in the Premier League.

[boyyanno]

I realise that you've moved the goalposts forward 1 year but in 2016/17 Pope, Tarks and Mc Neil were all in the squad. Tarks was kept out by England player Keane and Pope was kept out be England player Heaton.

George Boyd was topping the yards covered charts and JBG was a real quality player unlike the shadow he is now.

At this point, I wouldn't play Weghorst in front of Vokes, Barnes or Gray (all in the 2016/17) squad. Vokes scored 10 goals in 21 games (many as sub) that season. Barnes scored 6 in 20 and Gray scored 9 in 26.

In 2017/18, We added Wood, Cork, and Taylor. In that season, Wood scored 10 in 20 (1 in 2) and Barnes scored 9 in 21; scoring rates that puts them in the highest bracket in the Premier League.

You're massaging the truth a little bit here. Keane was established with us at that time and Tarks career was only just getting started. But Tarks has since become as good if not better than Keane. The same with Heaton and Pope.

To add to that Dwight's first PL appearance was in the 2017-2018 season, which again is later than you've suggested and it was a one off. He didn't become a regular until the 2018-19 season and that was midway through. JGB was also not the player you're suggesting, he started the 2018 season very well but wasn't a "Real quality" player, he got a goal and a couple of assists. Boyd worked hard granted.

You wouldn't play Weghorst above Gray or Vokes? Sorry but I completely disagree, Gray was an awful footballer. Vokes I loved here but he's not exactly got the pedigree of a Weghorst.

[boyyanno]

Yes. And that absolute and comparative under investment has gotten worse.
You say you accept that poor recruitment catches up but when someone is arguing that you're insisting "That's not down to recruitment, we just aren't getting the best out of what we have".
5 years ago a number of our key players were also younger and had more in the tank. This isn't a worse squad, I agree- but I disagree about it being worse in comparison because again, our recruitment has not kept pace.
Everton's squad is leagues above ours. We beat the admittedly weak lineup they put out, and we massively underperformed against Norwich, but any of Richarlison, Calvert-Lewin, Alli, Doucoure, Demarai Gray, Allan, would make our first XI, possibly Delph or Tom Davies, on his day Townsend. Our defence is better than theirs, that's the only unit of the pitch I'd say we're stronger in.
No I don't think Dyche has got the best from all of his players this season, but I think that is in part due to players declining because again, we haven't recruited to replace naturally aging players, some of whom (Westwood especially) have been overperforming for a few years. I'd say he's got the best out of Cornet given his record compared to before Burnley, the most out of Tarkowski, over-performing out of Lennon given his renaissance, possibly out of Rodriguez in the last few games. Definitely not out of McNeil or Weghorst, probably not out of Mee or Pope unusually. Midfield I honestly think it's just down to Brownhill not being good enough, and Westwood declining after having over-performed. Taylor & Pieters have been repeatedly injured so its hard to say- I'd say probably got the most out of Pieters, not out of Taylor. Roberts had a long layoff unwell so it's hard to identify the cause for his underperformance, Lowton I think was intended as backup this year and has probably done as well as you could expect. I think the majority of the players have settled down to expected performance levels after a few years over-performing, 1 or 2 over-performing, a handful under-performing some of which there's possible fitness factors. I remember a few years ago people thinking Barnes and a 19-year old McNeil should play for England- if that doesn't scream over-performing I don't know what does. We're not over-performing now as a team, that's for certain.
This does not change my view that I think Dyche remains the best option available to us given all factors. Saying that he's the best option is not the same thing as saying he's "the only man who can manage us", that's an asinine comparison. Every appointment ever made at managerial level is what you judge to be the best option- that doesn't mean you're saying they're perfect or the only man and you really have to stop putting words in people's mouths and making such hyperbolic reductions.
Dyche is not perfect. Dyche makes mistakes. But for now, I believe that he remains the best option available to us- not a messiah, not the only person who can manage Burnley FC< not bigger than the club- the best option realistically available, factoring in everything. And if we are relegated and off the pace for promotion, then yes, I would reassess and conclude it's time for a change. Right now, I don't believe it is. It really is as simple as that.

I have never said "it's not possible for a small team like us to stop up". I have said stagnant and declining recruitment has naturally caused our team to decline, especially relative to teams around us, so it is absolutely no surprise we are in the situation we are in regardless of who is manager.
Barton and Defour at their best were better than our current CMs are right now. Barnes at his best was a handful who offered more than Rodriguez or (currently) Weghorst right now. But Barton left, Defour's injuries caught up and he left, Barnes' injuries and age caught up and he declined, just as with Cork, just as with Westwood's decline. Of course if you assemble a team of the best players you've had over 5 years, assuming they're all at their peak, you do better. Christ, extend that to 10 years and we get Trippier, Keane, Austin, Ings, Heaton in their prime to pick from as well.
I keep making the point that the team has declined in large part due to declining investment meaning we have struggled to a) refresh naturally declining players and b) keep pace with the other teams constantly spending & moving forwards. You cannot actually be trying to play a gotcha over someone saying "A dream team of our last 5 years in their prime would do better than the current team", unless you actually believe this current Burnley side is the greatest possible XI we've had in that time. And I can't believe that you actually think we would be doing no better with those 3 in their prime. That was my whole point- funds and recruitment mean we have declined in a few key areas. What part of "our team has declined, arguably on absolute measures and certainly relative to our rivals, because we've not had the funds to recruit replacements or improvements" don't you get? Or do you seriously think that Barton & Defour as they were in 2016-17 wouldn't get in our current team and Cork would still be playing for England without Dyche?

You just don't grasp things very well do you? Firstly you've agreed you don't think Dyche is getting the best out of his players, so regardless of all the rubbish your spouting and your denial that Dyche has any blame in our failure you acknowledge he does.

Secondly what on earth are you talking about with regards to a combined 11

I mentioned the team of 5 years ago as you said we are a worse side now in comparison to the rest of the league than we ever have been. That's just not true, you're just making things up to try and substantiate your point. The below is our starting line-up for the first game in the season we stayed up, How anyone can say that we are worse in comparison to the league now than we were then I will never ever know. Our side now should comfortably trounce that one.

Heaton
2
Lowton
5
Keane
6
Mee
23
Ward
21
Boyd
8
Marney
14
Jones
37
Arfield
7
Gray
9
Vokes

[ClaretMov]

A question to the "Dyche can do no wrong and will bring us straight back up brigade" how long will you give him, because the rest of us are bored with the rigid predictable 442 football on offer, when will you be calling for his head.

A - At Christmas when we are mid table
B - At the end of this season
C - At the end of next season when we fail to return
D - Never because he can do no wrong

[ClaretPete001]

You're massaging the truth a little bit here. Keane was established with us at that time and Tarks career was only just getting started. But Tarks has since become as good if not better than Keane. The same with Heaton and Pope.

To add to that Dwight's first PL appearance was in the 2017-2018 season, which again is later than you've suggested and it was a one off. He didn't become a regular until the 2018-19 season and that was midway through. JGB was also not the player you're suggesting, he started the 2018 season very well but wasn't a "Real quality" player, he got a goal and a couple of assists. Boyd worked hard granted.

You wouldn't play Weghorst above Gray or Vokes? Sorry but I completely disagree, Gray was an awful footballer. Vokes I loved here but he's not exactly got the pedigree of a Weghorst.

I think you are cherry picking points.

The point is not that Tarks is as good as Keane. It is we had both of them. And Mee and Long.

Your point about JBG or Mc Neil is not the point we had them and Arfield, Brady, Barton, Defour, Hendrick, Westwood and Marney

Gray scored 1 in 3.5 in the Premiership. An awful player?????

We had Vokes, Gray and Barnes up front. You may feel Wout, Rodriguez and Vydra are better but ho hum so be it

The season after we came 7th.

[boyyanno]

I think you are cherry picking points.

The point is not that Tarks is as good as Keane. It is we had both of them. And Mee and Long.

Your point about JBG or Mc Neil is not the point we had them and Arfield, Brady, Barton, Defour, Hendrick, Westwood and Marney

Gray scored 1 in 3.5 in the Premiership. An awful player?????

We had Vokes, Gray and Barnes up front. You may feel Wout, Rodriguez and Vydra are better but ho hum so be it

The season after we came 7th.

That argument is very flawed. You can't include McNeil who was in our youth team at the time and include him with those players to try and make your point, he literally didn't play. Otherwise i'll have to wait 5 years to see if Helm and Richardson become good players and then I can say we had them in our current squad now (which would enhance my own argument). You can only look at the players in the starting 11 really for a comparison.

I've already posted our starting 11 from our first game that season, it's no better than what we have now even in comparison to the other clubs in the division.

[ClaretPete001]

You just don't grasp things very well do you? Firstly you've agreed you don't think Dyche is getting the best out of his players, so regardless of all the rubbish your spouting and your denial that Dyche has any blame in our failure you acknowledge he does.

Secondly what on earth are you talking about with regards to a combined 11

I mentioned the team of 5 years ago as you said we are a worse side now in comparison to the rest of the league than we ever have been. That's just not true, you're just making things up to try and substantiate your point. The below is our starting line-up for the first game in the season we stayed up, How anyone can say that we are worse in comparison to the league now than we were then I will never ever know. Our side now should comfortably trounce that one.

Heaton
2
Lowton
5
Keane
6
Mee
23
Ward
21
Boyd
8
Marney
14
Jones
37
Arfield
7
Gray
9
Vokes

I go back to my point above about cherry picking facts.

In the next game, Defour and Gray took Liverpool apart in a display even Diego Simeone would have been proud of.

20 per cent possession and never a doubt about the outcome. Possibly one of the finest Burnley performances I've ever seen and two superb goals.

[ClaretPete001]

That argument is very flawed. You can't include McNeil who was in our youth team at the time and include him with those players to try and make your point, he literally didn't play. Otherwise i'll have to wait 5 years to see if Helm and Richardson become good players and then I can say we had them in our current squad now (which would enhance my own argument). You can only look at the players in the starting 11 really for a comparison.

I've already posted our starting 11 from our first game that season, it's no better than what we have now even in comparison to the other clubs in the division.

Again cherry picking you pick out Mc Neil and ignore Defour, Barton and the rest.

And as I say above, another cherry picked point - in the next game we beat Liverpool 2-0! The squad easily achieved 40 points and went on to come 7th the season after.

[Newcastleclaret93]

That argument is very flawed. You can't include McNeil who was in our youth team at the time and include him with those players to try and make your point, he literally didn't play. Otherwise i'll have to wait 5 years to see if Helm and Richardson become good players and then I can say we had them in our current squad now (which would enhance my own argument). You can only look at the players in the starting 11 really for a comparison.

I've already posted our starting 11 from our first game that season, it's no better than what we have now even in comparison to the other clubs in the division.

From that team you posted my combined 11 would be:

Heaton
Lowton
Tarks
Mee
Ward
Arfield
Marney
Westwood
McNeil
Cornet
Gray

That’s 7 from the team 5 years ago and 6 from this team. There’s very little in it tbh. It shows how little the team has grown over the years.

[spt_claret]

Warning: following post is extremely long. I know this is nothing new this thread but the thing is I actually hate going on at such length. I just don't know how many times I have to elaborate on the same point before people listen. Don't blame anyone for skipping.

You just don't grasp things very well do you? Firstly you've agreed you don't think Dyche is getting the best out of his players, so regardless of all the rubbish your spouting and your denial that Dyche has any blame in our failure you acknowledge he does.

Secondly what on earth are you talking about with regards to a combined 11

I mentioned the team of 5 years ago as you said we are a worse side now in comparison to the rest of the league than we ever have been. That's just not true, you're just making things up to try and substantiate your point. The below is our starting line-up for the first game in the season we stayed up, How anyone can say that we are worse in comparison to the league now than we were then I will never ever know. Our side now should comfortably trounce that one.

Heaton
2
Lowton
5
Keane
6
Mee
23
Ward
21
Boyd
8
Marney
14
Jones
37
Arfield
7
Gray
9
Vokes

This is insufferable.
Players underperforming doesn't mean I want Dyche sacked. Saying that he's not got the best out of some and failed to get some to overperform doesn't mean I think he should be sacked. It also doesn't mean I think he's perfect- How are you still not getting that no matter how many times I say it?
Screw it. I'm happy to take a look at "underperforming". You probably hate analytics and stats for all your talk of wanting more modern managers but I'll use them. I've not done statistical data analysis properly for 8 or 9 years so I'm sure someone else is better equipped and it will take me a little while but from the cursory glance I've done so far it looks like I was actually wrong about Pope underperforming. And our defence are still overperforming. I'll post it if/when I manage to, so let's disregard this for now and go off eye test and opinion and assume they ARE underperforming, I'll get to it in a minute.

The combined 11 was directed at someone else. Not you.

Yes actually- our 16-17 team was in RELATIVE TERMS better than now- the Premier League improves every year. We have improved at a slower pace. Marney relative to the other teams around us was a better CM than Westwood now. Boyd likewise Vs Lennon. Likewise our fullbacks at the time. Likewise Mee (he has aged, he's still excellent but I'm not sure he's as above average anymore, I think that peaked in 2018-20). Likewise Vokes and Gray Vs Rodriguez and Vydra. Weghorst is massively underperforming no doubt. But in a number of areas our relative strength was better then than now, or at least equal- even if in ABSOLUTE terms some of our players now are better than we had then. We have not improved at the same pace as the rest of the league and I would argue in some areas have declined in absolute terms compared to a few years ago. Ie. We are weaker relatively, and in some areas weaker absolutely.
I don't disagree that in the first year back we overperformed to finish 16th you'd have expected 17-18th, Sunderland's team were dire but still underperformed to finish bottom even if Defoe did extremely well. I'd have expected Sunderland to be 16-18th. This year? I would expect us to finish 17th, because you always back the three promoted to be relegated. So yes, if we do go down we have underperformed (OR one of the 3 ie Brentford have massively overperformed), but it comes after years of OVER performing and failing to move forward.

The distinction is your view is that if we are relegated or in any way underperform, you're attributing this to Dyche first and foremost, and concluding that we both need to sack him and can find someone better who is available. You still seem to be thinking I'm saying Dyche is perfect when I have talked FAR longer than I wanted to just to keep reiterating to you that I'm not saying he's perfect or without fault - I'm saying that the primary and overwhelming cause of our underperformance is players either remaining static or declining due to age, years of overperformance, and failure to move the team forward absolutely and at least keep pace relatively, due to lack of investment, which is UNDERSTANDABLE given our finances,but ultimately means that compared to teams around us,we have gotten weaker, even if on a pure 1-1 basis some are better now than several years ago.

Football is not as simple as "if you get better you do better' you need to get better faster than rivals to do better and to get better at equal pace to keep pace. And given our resources, and historical overperformance with Dyche (and some favourable current metrics) it is madness to believe that the primary cause of this isn't financial. If we swapped Dyche we might see our midfield and forwards perform better (no guarantee and even if they matched expectations they would be too poor), but you would almost certainly see our defensive performance and overperformance BOTH decline. And given how much they're already overperforming, you'd need to see a MASSIVE increase in attacking overperformance, immediately, to offset the expected defensive decline to norm (and likely lowered norm).

Football is a sport where compared to most sports goals are hard to come by, which is why it has all sorts of statistical measures unique to itself and why creative and attacking players will always cost more than defensive players. Given our budget this means we can likely recruit better defensive players than attacking players, and would be exceptionally reliant on massive attacking overperformance if we tried to focus on attack with a change of strategy- which is less likely to occur than equivalent defensive performance and less likely to offset any drop in defensive performance. Is it possible that you could get a manager who can get cheap attackers to massively overperform AND prevent the defence from normalising? Theoretically, yes. It's not very likely and I can't think of any such example who we could realistically get.

I therefore believe based on all the data and evidence that our decline is not primarily due to Dyche and that EVEN IF he's made mistakes contributing to our decline, the oresponsibility he may have for this decline, is not significant or well evidenced enough to outweigh what he has proven to offer as a manager. I believe the odds of finding a manager who can offer more, who can do better given our resources, and who would actually join us, are extremely low, that the odds of such a decision ending up WORSE are high, that the odds of Dyche failing next season are lower than the odds of any manager we can realistically get, that this leaves him still the best man for the job. I believe if we are still struggling next season in the championship then that does suggest that enough of our decline is due to Dyche, that a change is worthwhile.

I am not saying he is the best manager in the world I am saying that on all balances of probability I believe he is currently the best manager currently available to us. I am not saying I know for categoric fact that nobody in the entire world could do a better job. I am saying the odds of finding one who will join us are low, the odds of finding someone worse are very high. How is it that I can say this time after time, writing long essays that I really DON'T want to write, and no matter how many times I say it you still insist that if Dyche has any flaws or made any mistakes that have cost us anything then it means he's got to be sacked? How many times do I have to say "Dyche isn't perfect but I believe he's still the best choice" before you accept that I'm not saying he's perfect? This is unreal.

To anyone who's sat through this post- congratulations you deserve a bloody medal. I hate such long messages but have no clue how many times I need to say the same thing,or how much detail I have to go into,before certain people will actually listen.

[spt_claret]

Can't seem to edit my last post- just seen a post where boyanno says he's not Dyche Out. If so I'm utterly mystified as to what he's arguing with me about full stop.

[ClaretPete001]

From that team you posted my combined 11 would be:

Heaton
Lowton
Tarks
Mee
Ward
Arfield
Marney
Westwood
McNeil
Cornet
Gray

That’s 7 from the team 5 years ago and 6 from this team. There’s very little in it tbh. It shows how little the team has grown over the years.

You also had Defour, Barton, Keane, Hendrick and Vokes to pick from.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016%E2%8 ... .C._season

I'd go for:

Heaton
Lowton
Tarks
Mee
Ward
Mc Neil
Defour
Barton
Cornet
Vokes
Gray

That's only 1 player from the current squad that wasn't available in 2016/17. Admittedly Mc Neil was young at the time but if I couldn't choose him I'd go for Arfield or Hendrick.

[tiger76]

A question to the "Dyche can do no wrong and will bring us straight back up brigade" how long will you give him, because the rest of us are bored with the rigid predictable 442 football on offer, when will you be calling for his head.

A - At Christmas when we are mid table
B - At the end of this season
C - At the end of next season when we fail to return
D - Never because he can do no wrong

As no-one else has given the courtesy of a reply I'll offer my thoughts, I actually agree with you that SD should go in the summer, yes he has been fantastic for us during his tenure just to clear that up, however the past 2 years have been horrendous, and it was only through luck that we survived last season, and the real issue for me is which attacking players have visibly shown improvement under Sean, yes he can organise a defence, but our attacking play is dire to witness, and again against the lower half sides we've struggled to create and score this season, this aligned to his bizarre reluctance to change formation and personnel, plus continually playing out of form players, and then on the one occasion we hit upon a formula that gained us points immediately reverting back to type in the following games are some of the main reasons why my patience has now been exhausted.

And it's not even the relegation that's particularly an issue, it was always likely to occur at some stage, but it's the shocking state of our squad, which has been built entirely on Sean's watch, and like you I predict a difficult return to the Championship, and those who think it'll be a breeze are in for a nasty surprise when reality hits.

Noe assuming we don't get our wish, and SD is retained for me the absolute minimum is to be in the play-off's all season, or even pushing the top 2, if we are nowhere near either of those targets come the Autumn then he should be gone, because we simply can't afford to spend long in the Championship carrying our present debt burden.

What really concerns me if Sean sticks around is he'll yet again extend the contracts of the older members of the squad, and that will just create even bigger problems down the track, many of the current squad should have been binned a couple of years ago, but for some reason we gave several further extensions, and now that legacy is coming back to haunt us big time.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

A question to the "Dyche can do no wrong and will bring us straight back up brigade" how long will you give him, because the rest of us are bored with the rigid predictable 442 football on offer, when will you be calling for his head.

A - At Christmas when we are mid table
B - At the end of this season
C - At the end of next season when we fail to return
D - Never because he can do no wrong

If we go down, it depends entirely on the recruitment this summer and what the squad looks like for next season.

If he's backed financially and signs some exciting new players then I'm expecting an immediate return, especially if we keep hold of a number of key players, like Mee, Pope, Cornet, Weghorst etc.
If he hasn't got us pushing hard for auto promotion and we're dossing midtable then he can go for me.

If he's not backed, loses a number of key players and has to pick up freebies like he did during his first full season here then I'll have more patience and wait until the end of next season.

[claretandbluesky]

Reasons for Dyche staying if we get relegated.

Been successful getting us out of the Championship.
Knows the players and their capabilities.
Expectations will be high, little room for failure.
Still has a good deal of credit in the bank with many supporters
Few viable alternatives for him
Will want to prove he still has the skills to succeed
No major upheaval at the club, business as normal.



Reasons his leaving might be a good thing

Feels like the end of an era, club needs a fresh start.
We’ve moved away from being an entertaining club to watch to being pragmatically dull, many would like a return to some flowing football.
SD’s apparent inability to bring on youth or make use of loanees makes us both inefficient and predictable and unable to maximise our opportunities.
Whilst SD is here young players will think long and hard before signing knowing they could be in the wilderness for years if their face doesn’t fit.
He really needs a new challenge just as we need a new sense of direction.
It gives Pace the opportunity to bring in a manager who buys into his vision.


Reasons SD leaving might mean things go wrong.

The players have been so used to the framework that any alternative might result in chaos and confusion on the pitch.
The fans demand for an instant return will put huge pressure on a new manager who might feel unable to experiment or introduce youngsters.
A sizeable grouping will be saying we should have kept SD and that it’s inevitable that without him we will fail.
New managers like players take time to bed in. Are we prepared to have a season of change when we perhaps don’t mount a promotion challenge.
A new manager might mean we spend more on players before the side has been properly assessed.
Marrying new and established players might prove difficult.

Obviously one could add to these lists but it perhaps gives us an idea of the challenges SD or his successor have.
SD is probably the more likely to get us back quickly, but unlikely to change his methods.
A successor might bring back Roy of the rovers football but is far less likely to get us promotion.
Take your choice.

[KRBFC]

I provided the whole picture, a balanced view so to speak, and you launched yourself in trying to mock me for it
I'm still waiting for your expert view as to who you would've dropped for Bamford.
Do I need to wait long?

When I'm wrong I'll admit it, but as yet...

You're still trying to drag it on by asking things I never claimed, I never once said Bamford should've started so why would I name who should've been dropped?

My entire point was using Chalobah and Bamford as examples of Dyche's willingness to use young players is stupid and inaccurate. If you stick by that view, fair enough I wont debate this further.

[boatshed bill]

If we go down, it depends entirely on the recruitment this summer and what the squad looks like for next season.

If he's backed financially and signs some exciting new players then I'm expecting an immediate return, especially if we keep hold of a number of key players, like Mee, Pope, Cornet, Weghorst etc.
If he hasn't got us pushing hard for auto promotion and we're dossing midtable then he can go for me.

If he's not backed, loses a number of key players and has to pick up freebies like he did during his first full season here then I'll have more patience and wait until the end of next season.

Sorry, but can you name the !"freebies", please.
Sorry, but I've forgotten how many there were. I do recall Eddie putting a half decent squad together which just needed a bit more "oomph"

[Jakubclaret]

The balanced view belongs in the sewer you’ve got half the first team upping sticks & upon expected relegation substantial reduced revenue & debt amassed & a manager (if he’s still here) earning sh1tloads, since ALK took over nothings gone right.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Sorry, but can you name the !"freebies", please.
Sorry, but I've forgotten how many there were. I do recall Eddie putting a half decent squad together which just needed a bit more "oomph"

Heaton, Jones, Arfield.

Then he picked up Barnes in January for £400k.

We had to sell Austin in that summer meaning he was.left with the journeyman striker Vokes and a relatively unproven youngster called Ings.

[Vegas Claret]

Jimmy Mullen's Claret and Blue army

[Paddy1882]

Rather sadly for me I’m at a point now where either way I’m not particularly bothered, I wouldn’t be adverse to him staying at all but if he was to leave I’d be massively greatful for what he has done for the club but I wouldn’t lose sleep over it. Whether my attitude is like that because of the football on show or just modern day football as a whole I’m not sure but my interest has certainly dwindled. For all those saying Dyche has done it before in terms of taking us up…. It doesn’t work like that in football I’m afraid, as Mr Bruce at West Brom and Mr Wilder at Boro (both achieved promotion more recently than Dyche) are finding out.

[jojomk1]

For the past 18 months this club has been going backwards at an alarming rate
We have an England goalkeeper who still looks like Bambi on ice with the ball at his feet ( thanks to good coaching ?)
He will be gone this summer with likely relegation, otherwise difficult to make World Cup squad
Replaced by Hennessey at 35
We have a back four where Roberts has not be seen to be any better than Lowton
Tarks and Mee will be gone leaving us with Collins and Long, neither of whom can play left hand side (excellent forward planning there)
Taylor will most likely go and Pieters (34) offered a new deal
We will start with Westwood and Brownhill in cm
JBG will be cover for McNeill who will be gone, and I would put £5 on Lennon being offered a new deal at 35
Up front I would not be surprised if Weghorst and Cornet have relegation release clauses on their new deals
Leaving us with Jay, Vydra and Barnes, all ooc (extension available for Basher if we decide to invoke)

And a dinosaur of a manager (who has been the main, but not only, reason for this shambles) being given another new 4 year deal
Whether we stay up or go down the rebuild needed this summer is a massive job
One that any manager would struggle with
No point in going back over the last six years or so giving pros and cons on past signings and past finishing positions in Prem or Championship
Living in the past on previous performances by the club has got us into this situation
Have seen nothing in the last 18 months that would suggest Dyche can improve this squad and would most likely see us stay in the Championship even after next season

Happy days

[ClaretMov]

All the one's telling us Dyche knows how to and is the man to get us out of the Championship, are you saying he's at his level in the championship, if and it's a big if he somehow takes us back up should we go down what would he do different in the Premier league compared to now, because I can't see how he changes his style that's so outdated regardless of what player's he's working with, all the attacking option's are sucked out of his squad's they are so set up not to lose they forget to win

[taio]

All the one's telling us Dyche knows how to and is the man to get us out of the Championship, are you saying he's at his level in the championship, if and it's a big if he somehow takes us back up should we go down what would he do different in the Premier league compared to now, because I can't see how he changes his style that's so outdated regardless of what player's he's working with, all the attacking option's are sucked out of his squad's they are so set up not to lose they forget to win

I don't believe the Championship is his level. Staying in the PL for at least six consecutive seasons proves that - completely exceeded any realistic person's expectations.