A question from atleti_female " are there any similarities between Leeds' relegation slump and Nottingham Forest's relegation in 05/06"?

atleti – A good question. I would say that when Forest were relegated in 1993 it was looked upon as the end of a typical cycle albeit a cycle that had, in the case of Forest, been more successful than anyone could have imagined. You have to take into consideration that between 1963 and 1993 only Everton, Liverpool and Arsenal had spent the entire time in the top flight. The likes of Manchester United, Spurs, Chelsea and Leeds had all been relegated during that period. Forest bounced back only to be relegated again in 1997 and it was after that they dug themselves into a deep financial hole.

Forest spent a lot of money on some very bad players especially when David Platt  was in charge. There was a spell with Paul Hart as manager when they looked as if they were going to rebound and at one point they made it to the Championship play offs only to lose in the semi final. Good young players were sold – Jermaine Jenas and Michael Dawson come to mind - and lacking resources their play deteriorated and then they dropped to the old third division.

The Leeds problem was a lot more complex although money – or the owing of it – has been the overwhelming issue. Leeds “business model” was based on spending – or borrowing through various means - gobs of money on players (normally young players who would improve) in order to establish the club as a major force in England and Europe and to then reap the massive financial rewards. The assumption was that if things turned for the worse then the players could be sold and the money spent – or the money borrowed to buy the players – could be recouped.

It all started to go wrong the season they reached the Champions League semi final only to lose to Valencia. They overreached and failed to finish in the top four in the Premiership that same season and so missed a CL spot for the next season. Although the Bosman ruling had come down in 1996 the full ramifications took a number of years to filter through the system and it was around 2001 that clubs began to fully understand that the ruling meant a major change in the way that they needed to do business. Instead of paying large fees to a club they could wait for a contract to end and then get the player without a transfer fee – e.g. Sol Campbell to Arsenal from Spurs. The other possibility was to pick up a player for a mere pittance of a transfer fee if they were in the last 12 months of their deal.

Essentially Leeds was operating on a model that considered players as assets that at least held their value and hopefully increased in value. The reality was that with the exception of a few of the very best players, fees paid for players became sunk costs and in most cases players were actually depreciating assets. Interestingly the only case I can think of when the Leeds model actually paid off was in the case of Rio Ferdinand who they made a significant profit on after buying him from West Ham and selling to Manchester United.

Leeds situation also included the infamous Bowyer/Woodgate alleged assault on an Asian student that went to court. Then Manager David O’Leary wrote a book that included significant comment on the case and a lot of Leeds fans and observers believe that O’Leary’s decision to sell his opinion undermined morale in the dressing room and so began a death spiral. As clubs realized that Leeds were desperate to raise cash the more they hedged knowing that the longer they waited the lower the fee became.

Even with new ownership Leeds has been unable to break free of the debt monster. While maintaining some of the highest – if not the highest – ticket prices outside of the Premiership the debts that remain have essentially crippled the club. Last season Leeds came close to regaining a Premiership position but it proved to be a false dawn. Now life in League One beckons.