maffff Missed our first season up there in What about the argument that "first timers are Naive to the Premier League"?
Yeah I messaged him about it and he's going to correct it
by Sebastian the Red » 24 May 2017 11:07
maffff Missed our first season up there in What about the argument that "first timers are Naive to the Premier League"?
by Sebastian the Red » 24 May 2017 11:11
NewCorkSeth Reads like nonsense to me. More affects teams than the statistics he presented. Manager, money, academy, opposition change, players bought/sold.
by NewCorkSeth » 24 May 2017 11:23
Sebastian the RedNewCorkSeth Reads like nonsense to me. More affects teams than the statistics he presented. Manager, money, academy, opposition change, players bought/sold.
Yes, lots of things can have an affect - and things will be distorted now, more than ever, because of the extra case and larger disparity between the leagues - but with a sample of over 20 seasons, it's interesting to look at the trends, IMO.
by Nameless » 24 May 2017 11:24
by Sebastian the Red » 24 May 2017 11:34
Nameless It's a weird mish mash.
He talks of a 'model' but doesn't suggest one. Looking at how many times things have happened in isolation is not a 'model'. You talk of 'trends' but he doesn't look at trends.
He picks a load of things and pulls together numbers but doesn't really look at them in any detail or suggest that the whole thing is so much more complex. There is no justification for why he has look d at the specific things he does when he could have analysed any number of other things (number of players used, disciplinary issues, games won from a losing position, games lost from a winning position etc etc etc
Some of the ideas are just crazy. To suggest that the % of goals your top scorer gets in the Championship has an influence on how likely you are to stay in the PL for 5 years is very odd. The vast majority of teams will pretty much churn their entire team in a 5 year period, so to look at a team in a sixth year and draw any conclusions about how a different team will perform just doesn't work.
File under the Information is Beautiful category, maybe a bit of fun but ultimately of little value. I could have told him that whoever wins the playoff will have it tough next season but th n I could have told him Fulham would have had it tougher if they had been good enough to make the final, let alone win it.....
by Nameless » 24 May 2017 11:41
by Sebastian the Red » 24 May 2017 12:19
Nameless And critiquing it is a way of passing another 5 minutes....
He seems to think it IS a serious analysis, we all love crazy stats but not sure it warrants dressing up as being something it isn't.
Still , one more in the 'reasons to be happy Fulham got beaten' category....
by Forbury Lion » 24 May 2017 13:22
This was news to me.They hold secured the greatest Goal Difference in a single season with +67
by Fox Talbot » 24 May 2017 13:22
by maffff » 24 May 2017 19:47
by Ian Royal » 25 May 2017 11:25
Strandedtidus_mi2 I think our poor defensive record and poor goal difference gets skewed by the odd away thrashings we've had. Otherwise we're a fairly consistent side.
What I think would be more interesting as a Stat, which he probably didn't do as not easy to get the stats, is is there any correlation between amount of clean sheets kept and performance. We kept 15 out of 46 games (32.6%), which I'm sure is massively high compared to other teams who have conceded 60+ goals in a season.
After all, it doesn't matter if you lose a game 1-0 or 7-1 but keep clean sheets in a 3rd of your games in any league and you are going to be comfortably safe at worst I would expect.
by Ian Royal » 25 May 2017 11:27
maffff Highlights what a loss Sidwell was.
Doesn't highlight the difference complacency setting in can be.
by SCIAG » 25 May 2017 11:59
by stealthpapes » 28 May 2017 14:03
1. Points are not the only indicator of how successful promoted teams are/will be in the PL.
2. Teams who score lots of goals, but are not overly reliant on 1 striker tend to do very well in the PL.
3. Teams who concede a lot of goals in the Championship do badly in the PL.
4. Teams with strong Championship defences are able to survive in the PL in the Short Term but do not stay for long if they cannot score.
5. Teams that win the Championship are more likely to not only survive in the PL, but also to go on and prosper.
6. Playoff Teams are more likely to be relegated at the first attempt and are much less likely to go on and have a prolonged stay in the PL.
7. Newcastle have a VERY strong chance of staying up. They are well positoned to go on and become an established PL side.
8. Brighton have a good chance of staying up next year and are also in with a good chance of becoming an established PL side.
9. Reading and Huddersfield are both well and truly fucked.
by stealthpapes » 28 May 2017 14:17
Ian Royalmaffff Highlights what a loss Sidwell was.
Doesn't highlight the difference complacency setting in can be.
It does show how important good scouting and transfers are. We simply didn't make the transition to PL quality signings and relied on an aging team that had lost a key cog. Fae, Halford, Duberry, Rosenior, Cisse, Kebe - woeful transfers for the level we were trying to compete at. And massive overspending on them considering their quality.
Users browsing this forum: Horsham Royal, Jammy Dodger, Royals and Racers and 351 guests