woddyuk Posted 4 December 2014 Posted 4 December 2014 Let's apply some maths to the problem instead of emotion. Since premier league started the average points you need to stay up is 37. West Ham went down in 03 with 42 points, WBA,stayed up with 34 in 05. Derby went down with the lowest points ever, 11, in 08.So we only need two points to be better than Derby Now projecting all teams average points per games ratio so far, this season you will need 40 points to be safe. City currently have 10. That's 0.714 per game. If that continues without change, we will amass 27 points and either be relegated or set a new lowest record for staying up. Like a cricket run rate, To get to 37 points, we require 1.12 per game. 40 1.25 per game. 42 1.33 per game and as no team has ever gone down 43 is 1.375 per game.Which is almost double what we have been getting. If we were to make 43 points and still go down then have the comfort of setting a new record for that instead. In summary, what ever players,management, or even kit washers we have, we need to start winning games as time is already running out! Sod the performance, get the three points. Let's start at Villa Sunday.
Manwell Pablo Posted 4 December 2014 Posted 4 December 2014 didn't outplay liverpool? They didn't create a single chance themselves, only through our own poor play..... Kasper didn't make a save. The way he's playing I,m not surprised It's actually true, 3 shots on goal, three goals.
inckley fox Posted 4 December 2014 Posted 4 December 2014 It's actually true, 3 shots on goal, three goals. Like the Man U game! Unless my memory fails me (which it does, frequently).
The Horse's Mouth Posted 4 December 2014 Posted 4 December 2014 How is this "interesting"? the fact they're in the championship is a bigger hint enough, and just "replacing a manager" isn't enough context. If you look at the changes most were destined to fail, like Terry Connor for Wolves, Paul Jewell for Derby. etc. Also why are you counting blackpool? Holloway stayed for another season after the relegation. I also don't see the point in selecting the season after either, it's quite rare that teams stick by the manager after a relegation. Holloway being a rare example.
the messenger Posted 4 December 2014 Posted 4 December 2014 15/24 teams in the championship have been in the premier league recently... All either replaced their manager their relegation season, or during the season after...None stayed up, or returned to the premier league within a season...or look likely to. (Derby, M'boro, Blackburn, Norwich, Fulham, Cardiff, Watford, Charlton, Wolves, Reading, Birmingham, Bolton, Wigan, Blackpool, Ipswich So let's sack the guy who has won us 2 promotions, got us to the play-offs twice, and just selected a side which outplayed liverpool in the leaguess But we still lost! And our defence is gonna be the reason we get relegated, And Pearson's blind faith in it.
Webbo Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 Has there ever been a manager that had a side relegated after a full season and succeeded in getting them promoted again first time? I stuck a tenner on winning the championship the season after we were relegated under Micky Adams and it took 10 years , MA resigned in the October. Once you've been relegated it's over.Once the players (that stay), the board and fans have lost faith you're on a hiding to nothing.
Babylon Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 Has there ever been a manager that had a side relegated after a full season and succeeded in getting them promoted again first time? I stuck a tenner on winning the championship the season after we were relegated under Micky Adams and it took 10 years , MA resigned in the October. Once you've been relegated it's over.Once the players (that stay), the board and fans have lost faith you're on a hiding to nothing. How many times is it the original manager in charge still, I'd say not very often does a man take a team up, come down again and still be with them.
Webbo Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 How many times is it the original manager in charge still, I'd say not very often does a man take a team up, come down again and still be with them. Which just proves these stats are meaningless.
Dickov22 Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 15/24 teams in the championship have been in the premier league recently... All either replaced their manager their relegation season, or during the season after...None stayed up, or returned to the premier league within a season...or look likely to. (Derby, M'boro, Blackburn, Norwich, Fulham, Cardiff, Watford, Charlton, Wolves, Reading, Birmingham, Bolton, Wigan, Blackpool, Ipswich So let's sack the guy who has won us 2 promotions, got us to the play-offs twice, and just selected a side which outplayed liverpool in the league. Your post made perfect sense until this! The only thing we matched Liverpool with on Tuesday night was effort, how you can seriously say we outplayed them is beyond me. The last ten minutes in particular were a complete embarrassment - lumping ball after ball into their penalty area. I honestly can't remember the last time that worked and produced a goal.
Grewks Posted 5 December 2014 Author Posted 5 December 2014 How is this "interesting"? the fact they're in the championship is a bigger hint enough, and just "replacing a manager" isn't enough context. If you look at the changes most were destined to fail, like Terry Connor for Wolves, Paul Jewell for Derby. etc. Also why are you counting blackpool? Holloway stayed for another season after the relegation. I also don't see the point in selecting the season after either, it's quite rare that teams stick by the manager after a relegation. Holloway being a rare example. Do you not understand the point? Mick Mccarthy was sacked at wolves, likewise Davies at Derby during their premier league seasons......therefore you are only continuing to prove my point. Exactly....Holloway stayed for a season...now look at where they are after he left.
Finn Claw II Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 I think the more interesting stat is wage bill and transfer spend. I'd bet we have the second lowest wage budget and second lowest transfer spend this season. Money and success are highly correlated in football. Unless we spend £20m to £30m on 4 quality players in Jan we will go down. The gulf is massive
Grewks Posted 5 December 2014 Author Posted 5 December 2014 I think the more interesting stat is wage bill and transfer spend. I'd bet we have the second lowest wage budget and second lowest transfer spend this season. Money and success are highly correlated in football. Unless we spend £20m to £30m on 4 quality players in Jan we will go down. The gulf is massive We haven't been totally outplayed this season.. When we have been at our best, we have been very competitive.
Finn Claw II Posted 5 December 2014 Posted 5 December 2014 We haven't been totally outplayed this season.. When we have been at our best, we have been very competitive. I agree that we compete, I think we don't take enough of our chances vs how well we defend and I don't see how that changes without some real quality. £10m unfortunately doesn't get you much these days
Grewks Posted 5 December 2014 Author Posted 5 December 2014 I agree that we compete, I think we don't take enough of our chances vs how well we defend and I don't see how that changes without some real quality. £10m unfortunately doesn't get you much these days The thing is, if the 'gulf is massive'...why do relegated sides struggle so much to get promoted straight away? Especially those like norwich who have really only added to their squad.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 Do you not understand the point? Mick Mccarthy was sacked at wolves, likewise Davies at Derby during their premier league seasons......therefore you are only continuing to prove my point. Exactly....Holloway stayed for a season...now look at where they are after he left. What? but he didn't get sacked and got them into play-offs, it's irrelevant where they ended up now.
Grewks Posted 6 December 2014 Author Posted 6 December 2014 What? but he didn't get sacked and got them into play-offs, it's irrelevant where they ended up now. Which point are you arguing against? Mccarthy sacked - Wolves Relegated Davies sacked - Derby Relegated Holloway leaves blackpool - Finish in lower position than under holloway.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 Which point are you arguing against? Mccarthy sacked - Wolves Relegated Davies sacked - Derby Relegated Holloway leaves blackpool - Finish in lower position than under holloway. Holloway, because he WASN'T SACKED. So how can he contribute to a "sacking statistic."
Grewks Posted 6 December 2014 Author Posted 6 December 2014 Holloway, because he WASN'T SACKED. So how can he contribute to a "sacking statistic." Are you seriously telling me there is a difference between a manager being sacked, or simply resigning, with regards to player performance? How can you say that players play better if their ex manager resigned rather than be sacked? Stop being pathetically pedantic.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 Are you seriously telling me there is a difference between a manager being sacked, or simply resigning, with regards to player performance? How can you say that players play better if their ex manager resigned rather than be sacked? Stop being pathetically pedantic. But the thing is, he qualifies for none of these stips you put in the op. One he didn't get sacked in his season in the prem, two he didn't get sacked in his first season back in the championship and actually got them in the play-offs. third he left after the two seasons you highlighted without being "sacked". In reference to the balded, I never even fecking said that, the effect it has on the players was not my point.
Grewks Posted 6 December 2014 Author Posted 6 December 2014 But the thing is, he qualifies for none of these stips you put in the op. One he didn't get sacked in his season in the prem, two he didn't get sacked in his first season back in the championship and actually got them in the play-offs. third he left after the two seasons you highlighted without being "sacked". In reference to the balded, I never even fecking said that, the effect it has on the players was not my point. 15 examples.....are you choose one which isn't even an exception.. When Holloway left, Blackpool went backwards, therefore suggesting that ALL 15 examples i have given support the fact that 100% of all previous sackings/departures from relegated sides from the premier league, have only ever ended with failure. In fact your point only strengthens my argument. The fact Holloway got blackpool into the play-offs the season after, suggests that Continuity is far more successful than the employment of a new manager. Why do you want pearson gone? As one can only assume from your pedantic attitude, that you favor no argument in favor of keeping pearson.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 15 examples.....are you choose one which isn't even an exception.. When Holloway left, Blackpool went backwards, therefore suggesting that ALL 15 examples i have given support the fact that 100% of all previous sackings/departures from relegated sides from the premier league, have only ever ended with failure. In fact your point only strengthens my argument. The fact Holloway got blackpool into the play-offs the season after, suggests that Continuity is far more successful than the employment of a new manager. Why do you want pearson gone? As one can only assume from your pedantic attitude, that you favor no argument in favor of keeping pearson. I'm not disputing the point, and I don't want Pearson gone you utter moron. I was simply disputing the use of Blackpool in there when it doesn't qualify for the stipulations you put in place and in fact it contradicts the other examples you've put in there. That was all, stop trying to put statements in there that I've never made nor am disputing. I did mention Wolves,Derby but that was simply to put forward that I don't value the statistic because those examples were destined to fail from the get go.
Grewks Posted 6 December 2014 Author Posted 6 December 2014 I'm not disputing the point, and I don't want Pearson gone you utter moron. I was simply disputing the use of Blackpool in there when it doesn't qualify for the stipulations you put in place and in fact it contradicts the other examples you've put in there. That was all, stop trying to put statements in there that I've never made nor am disputing. I did mention Wolves,Derby but that was simply to put forward that I don't value the statistic because those examples were destined to fail from the get go. That is the point......
Guest Col city fan Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 That is the point...... Don't try to use any sort of intellect with The Horse's Ass..its futile
The Horse's Mouth Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 That is the point...... WHICH I DIDN'T DISPUTE. **** me sideways. Don't try to use any sort of intellect with The Horse's Ass..its futile , what an original comment.
muzzy1981 Posted 6 December 2014 Posted 6 December 2014 Whether we keep Pearson or not, let's just get one thing clear - he does NOT know what he is doing. All this stupid talk about he knows what he's doing so let's keep him is ridiculous. His only chance is to keep the faith of the players and hope that through their desire and effort we can survive. The facts are Pearson got good results earlier in the season because the players believed what Pearson said about them and they thought they could walk on water and they sort of did against Everton, Arsenal, Man Utd, Chelsea and Stoke. Now they do not believe in themselves anymore and that may be because they have lost faith in themselves or because they are not good enough and Pearson got it badly wrong. All this talk about Pearson got us two promotions is ok, but it must be balanced with the undeniable fact that two seasons ago we were nailed on for automatic promotion with 17 games to go and we didn't win another match. Past history and statistics can be used for any argument, but we are nearly half way towards beating that record. Talk about focussing on the negatives by highlighting our almost season before we absolutely smashed the league. The fact is we had a great start then went on a poor run were we were losing and playing badly, but the last three games we have played much better but lost and IMO look like a team about to turn things around.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.