Manwell Pablo Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Still persisting in an annoying pointless points system -2 (-6.0 overall)A pointless points system, bit useless that is.the games i seen him play in he looks ball greedy but he also looks like a great player and i reckon he will do great for us i just wish he was a right sided player because i was hoping to see porter allot when the season starts.which games were they then. Who was he playing for and who were they playing.
Daggers Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 which games were they then. Who was he playing for and who were they playing. Football Manager 2007 (Nazi edition)
Gené and Tonic Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Regarding the points system, what is a good total for MA? *Cue mass onslaught mocking the points system
Daggers Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Regarding the points system, what is a good total for MA?*Cue mass onslaught mocking the points system Are you refering to Thracian's ridiculous points system, the three points for a win system or a third system that has yet to figure in a large way on this forum?
Fez of Mahrez Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Regarding the points system, what is a good total for MA?*Cue mass onslaught mocking the points system Well of course you'll get a mass onslaught mocking the points system. It's not relative to anything, seems to have no logical conclusion and could be completely discredited after about three games!
Gené and Tonic Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Well it's more of a question to Thracian He could have put a target for him to get to or something. If it's just adding and taking away numbers each time something happens I agree it is completely pointless
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Well it's more of a question to ThracianHe could have put a target for him to get to or something. If it's just adding and taking away numbers each time something happens I agree it is completely pointless It's not pointless, it has points for good signing, wins, and the condition of Louis Dodd's hair.
Daggers Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 If it's just adding and taking away numbers each time something happens I agree it is completely pointless +1,000,000 for excellent observation
a-fox Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 which games were they then. Who was he playing for and who were they playing.play offsFootball Manager 2007 (Nazi edition)hes not on the 2007 edition you plank.
Gené and Tonic Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Nah the Nazi edition. It was brought out in February
Joe. Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 hes not on the 2007 edition you plank. I think you'll find he is. Plank. (If you're on about Hayes on FM)
The People's Hero Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Well of course you'll get a mass onslaught mocking the points system. It's not relative to anything, seems to have no logical conclusion and could be completely discredited after about three games! You forgot to use the word 'demonstrably' - it makes any ludicrous argument or opinion become gospel and fact in the eyes of second-rate journalists the world over.
a-fox Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 I think you'll find he is. Plank. (If you're on about Hayes on FM) didn't know you had the nazi edition we should play each other online ?
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Nah the Nazi edition. It was brought out in February hows it work then?Is it like being Atheltico Bilbao on Champ 01/02 and only being allowed to sign Basque players? Obviously Arien instead of Basque in this case. didn't know you had the nazi edition we should play each other online ? Ha ha, give him his dues that is quite funny.
Daggers Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 play offshes not on the 2007 edition you plank. I think you'll find he is. Plank. :w00t: :laugh: nazi-fox is like Wil-E-Coyote only without the charm, humour or intelligence. What a prize twat.
weggy1976 Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 was just thinking.... we only just returned back for pre seasons training so even if he was on trial 2 weeks ago MA wouldnt of learnt much seeing him train on his own... and MA said on his blog he has just got back from holiday. So guess he wouldn't have seen him at all !! Why would he need a trial if he played a dozen games for MK Dons ??
weggy1976 Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 I heard that Hayes is MA's 1st signing. Indicating MM has chose all the others !
Thracian Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Well it's more of a question to ThracianHe could have put a target for him to get to or something. If it's just adding and taking away numbers each time something happens I agree it is completely pointless I'm surprised it's caused such agitation - I suppose it's rather like someone wearing a yellow coat instead of a sombre suit at a law firm. If it doesn't fit the norm it kind of irritates. To explain a little. Some have criticised me for being a bit harsh on managers, even a bit reactionary on occasions and I thought it might help to have a sort of barometer which gauges the highs and lows, good and bad if you like, of our manager through the season. Of course it is only one opinion and there is no previous yardstick by which to measure the performance of our other recent managers. But I'd think it fair to say both Kelly and Levein would have well in the red by the time their were ditched and I'd have been interested to know how far in the red before the axe actually fell. I've given myself no restrictive parameters such as +1 point for a good signing or -1 for a bad one but simply want to base things on what seems to be fair and see where it goes. For the matches it won't just depend on the result although that will be important but also the performance. Probably +2 for a win and +1 or +2 if the performance has been good or excellent, adjustable according to general consensus.. Overall the idea should gauge how good MA has been for the club at any given time. The performance of the players could help measure that too. It's experimental of course but hardly that unusual. Statisticians have been measuring all sorts of aspects of footballing performance for years and whole web sites are devoted to their findings. So far MA would be doing well at +10.5 against Kelly whose close season signings were so infrequent and so disappointing. Overall so little happened during Kelly's pre-season it is hard to imagine where he would have mustered his pluses, apart from his signing of McAuley and the number of pre-season friendly wins. Against that would be a stack of minuses, something largely missing with MA so far although some of his signings have yet to be finally judged. I hope the above helps but stress that no-one is obliged to take any notice anyway and some, for sure, probably won't, except in a negative way.
potter3 Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 I heard that Hayes is MA's 1st signing. Indicating MM has chose all the others ! Or Mackay?
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 I'm surprised it's caused such agitation - I suppose it's rather like someone wearing a yellow coat instead of a sombre suit at a law firm. If it doesn't fit the norm it kind of irritates.To explain a little. Some have criticised me for being a bit harsh on managers, even a bit reactionary on occasions and I thought it might help to have a sort of barometer which gauges the highs and lows, good and bad if you like, of our manager through the season. Of course it is only one opinion and there is no previous yardstick by which to measure the performance of our other recent managers. But I'd think it fair to say both Kelly and Levein would have well in the red by the time their were ditched and I'd have been interested to know how far in the red before the axe actually fell. I've given myself no restrictive parameters such as +1 point for a good signing or -1 for a bad one but simply want to base things on what seems to be fair and see where it goes. For the matches it won't just depend on the result although that will be important but also the performance. Probably +2 for a win and +1 or +2 if the performance has been good or excellent, adjustable according to general consensus.. Overall the idea should gauge how good MA has been for the club at any given time. The performance of the players could help measure that too. It's experimental of course but hardly that unusual. Statisticians have been measuring all sorts of aspects of footballing performance for years and whole web sites are devoted to their findings. So far MA would be doing well at +10.5 against Kelly whose close season signings were so infrequent and so disappointing. Overall so little happened during Kelly's pre-season it is hard to imagine where he would have mustered his pluses, apart from his signing of McAuley and the number of pre-season friendly wins. Against that would be a stack of minuses, something largely missing with MA so far although some of his signings have yet to be finally judged. I hope the above helps but stress that no-one is obliged to take any notice anyway and some, for sure, probably won't, except in a negative way. I think that paticular analogy is funnier than any of the piss takes. . Tharcian your point system is agitating because it is relative to absloutley nothing and has no laws. It's completley stupid!!!!
Thracian Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 I think that paticular analogy is funnier than any of the piss takes. .Tharcian your point system is agitating because it is relative to absloutley nothing and has no laws. It's completley stupid!!!! Even without any "previous" for comparison purposes it is still relative to zero which represents a Joe Average manager, neither good nor bad. Had the idea been used with Kelly I am sure it would have made his inadequacies clear long before we were flirting with relegation again.
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Even without any "previous" for comparison purposes it is still relative to zero which represents a Joe Average manager, neither good nor bad.Had the idea been used with Kelly I am sure it would have made his inadequacies clear long before we were flirting with relegation again. ok so 0 is relative to the non exsistant average manager. What are you points relative to and on what scale? I mean you have down as +10 already and to make that makes him a ****ing good manager, he's not even been in charge for a game yet competitvie or otherwise! it's based around your opinion, it's pointless!!!! If you start quoting that bloody quote system as a reason for sacking him I'll go spare you do relise this!!
Zingari Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 Even without any "previous" for comparison purposes it is still relative to zero which represents a Joe Average manager, neither good nor bad.Had the idea been used with Kelly I am sure it would have made his inadequacies clear long before we were flirting with relegation again. stick with it i think its an idea thats worth an airing and as you say , its just a bit of fun and can be ignored by anyone ; whats often lacking on these boards is a character willing and able to try out different things ,and seem preoccupied with either agreement in the gentlemen's club or mob mentality attacks on individual posters with differing opinions ; the forum needs variety and individualism such as yours
The People's Hero Posted 4 July 2007 Posted 4 July 2007 stick with it i think its an idea thats worth an airing and as you say , its just a bit of fun and can be ignored by anyone ; whats often lacking on these boards is a character willing and able to try out different things ,and seem preoccupied with either agreement in the gentlemen's club or mob mentality attacks on individual posters with differing opinions ; the forum needs variety and individualism such as yours I can tell you don't read his posts often!
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.