The "do they mean us?" thread pt 3

[Sly]

32 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

What’s the point of this table it means nothing if every team has played a different number of matches?

It’s the points per game bit that it’s sorted by. 
 

it’s slightly misleading, as it isn’t purely league games from what I can work out. 

[Leicester_Loyal]

Man City are so far ahead of the rest, even their goals scored is miles ahead.

 

Tbf to Burnley their goals against is really good compared to other teams down there, although obviously they are bottom of the table so that's not great.

[BKLFox]

2 hours ago, nabb7 said:

It’s ranked on points per game

 

1 hour ago, Sly said:

It’s the points per game bit that it’s sorted by. 
 

it’s slightly misleading, as it isn’t purely league games from what I can work out. 

I guess I’m being thick but that’s my point you have more chance of being further up that table if you’ve had more games thus more chance to gain more points 🤷‍♂️ 
Sunderland have played 13 more games than us for instance of course they have a higher probability of being higher up that table which to me just renders the table pointless.

Well done Ben for working it all out but think he just has to much time on his hands 😆 

 

It’s like those stupid stats sky like to come out with during a game, Man C have had 87% possession in the last 5 minutes (any given time during a match not the overall) of any particular game, again just pointless 🤷‍♂️ 

Edited 31 December 2021 by BKLFox

[KingsX]

The day Einstein just chucked it in.

 

[Sly]

15 minutes ago, BKLFox said:

 

I guess I’m being thick but that’s my point you have more chance of being further up that table if you’ve had more games thus more chance to gain more points 🤷‍♂️ 
Sunderland have played 13 more games than us for instance of course they have a higher probability of being higher up that table which to me just renders the table pointless.

Well done Ben for working it all out but think he just has to much time on his hands 😆 

 

It’s like those stupid stats sky like to come out with during a game, Man C have had 87% possession in the last 5 minutes (any given time during a match not the overall) of any particular game, again just pointless 🤷‍♂️ 

Not quite ….

 

100 games - 250 points - Score 2.5

 

300 games - 100 points - Score 0.33

 

It’s just an average on how they perform per game. 
 

You’d argue that Sunderland should be as high as they are, due to being at a lower level. When we were in league 1, we’d have been really high on that list. 

Edited 31 December 2021 by Sly

[Sunbury Fox]

7 hours ago, StanSP said:

 

10th out of all PL teams. 

 

And people really wanted Sean Dyche here?! 

This table only underlines the increasing and worrying dominance of Man City. We are heading for a Ligue 1 or Bundesliga scenario if we're not careful. 

[BKLFox]

8 minutes ago, Sly said:

Not quite ….

 

100 games - 250 points - Score 2.5

 

300 games - 100 points - Score 0.33

 

It’s just an average on how they perform per game. 
 

You’d argue that Sunderland should be as high as they are, due to being at a lower level. When we were in league 1, we’d have been really high on that list. 

Cheers Sly I’m sure there’s logic to it and some like to see that particular stat laid out in a table.

[foxinsocks]

2 minutes ago, Sunbury Fox said:

This table only underlines the increasing and worrying dominance of Man City. We are heading for a Ligue 1 or Bundesliga scenario if we're not careful. 

now the saudis have bought Newcastle, that just leave Assad top buy Sunderland and then they can challenge man city. Liverpool have not got the resources... and abramovic is losing interest.  WE would have to double our wage bill to compete - and I am not sure our income would support it.

[coolhandfox]

1 hour ago, Sunbury Fox said:

This table only underlines the increasing and worrying dominance of Man City. We are heading for a Ligue 1 or Bundesliga scenario if we're not careful. 

People said the same thing about Blackburn, then Man U, then Chelsea.

 

Who thought Man U would be without a league title in 8 years, after winning 13 of the first 21.

[Sly]

1 hour ago, BKLFox said:

Cheers Sly I’m sure there’s logic to it and some like to see that particular stat laid out in a table.

Without doubt, it’s still semi flawed, ultimately the best read, is the current table. 

[Sly]

11 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

People said the same thing about Blackburn, then Man U, then Chelsea.

 

Who thought Man U would be without a league title in 8 years, after winning 13 of the first 21.

It’s a state of flux. 
 

Blackburn were the first big spenders.

 

Manchester United, Liverpool etc have always had the largest following and have been a cash cow. 

Chelsea then how the money poured into them by Roman ….

Wenger whilst having money, built a decent squad at a semi fraction of the price the others spent. Since then they’ve wasted money but at least picked up FA Cups along the way. 
 

Newcastle will be next, they’ll push Manchester City, so this won’t be a 1 team league. 
 

Manchester City have 2 teams that could ultimately be better than all but the top 4.  

 

[Finnegan]

1 hour ago, Sunbury Fox said:

This table only underlines the increasing and worrying dominance of Man City. We are heading for a Ligue 1 or Bundesliga scenario if we're not careful. 

 

There's a ceiling to what even they can spend. United and Chelsea can effectively match it, or match it enough to compete blow for blow. Even Liverpool have enough resources to essentially buy most of the world's best players and eventually Newcastle WILL get there. 

 

The only thing that makes Man City so much stronger at the moment is probably the best manager of this century. 

 

He won't be there much longer. We'll see how they cope with someone else in charge. 

[Tommy Fresh]

37 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

There's a ceiling to what even they can spend. United and Chelsea can effectively match it, or match it enough to compete blow for blow. Even Liverpool have enough resources to essentially buy most of the world's best players and eventually Newcastle WILL get there. 

 

The only thing that makes Man City so much stronger at the moment is probably the best manager of this century. 

 

He won't be there much longer. We'll see how they cope with someone else in charge. 

Additionally how many other clubs are part of the City Group? I imagine that helps massively in terms of scouting and bringing through better youngsters also means they they can sign and loan players out all over the world.

 

The set up in general is miles ahead of United and Chelsea 

[Sly]

31 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

There's a ceiling to what even they can spend. United and Chelsea can effectively match it, or match it enough to compete blow for blow. Even Liverpool have enough resources to essentially buy most of the world's best players and eventually Newcastle WILL get there. 

 

The only thing that makes Man City so much stronger at the moment is probably the best manager of this century. 

 

He won't be there much longer. We'll see how they cope with someone else in charge. 

Next season will be interesting. 
 

Conte is already improving Spurs. 
 

Klopps’ Liverpool are a really, really good team.

 

Tuchel has a Chelsea team that have proven they can beat the best. 

 

I don’t think Howe is the man to finish the Newcastle job, however he’ll improve them before the next person picks up the reigns. 
 

Say what you want about about being a Lego man and grade B / fake Pep, however Arteta is doing a solid job at Arsenal, they’re improving. 

 

Then we have Leicester, a team that is a threat to all of the above. A team that has shown we can upset the odds and be the  feared underdog. 
 

This is why the Premier League is the best league in football. 

 

 

 

[don_danbury]

i think tuchel will be gone next season. such an overrated manager 

[Sly]

3 minutes ago, don_danbury said:

i think tuchel will be gone next season. such an overrated manager 

I don’t think he’s overrated. He’s the sort of Manager that can turn a team quickly and improve them. Tactically he improved Chelsea quickly and tweaked Lampards squad (& Sarri /Conte), to achieve quick success. 
 

Without a doubt, he’s a top, top coach but his inability to deal with egos, will only ever make him a short term option. 

[Paninistickers]

25 minutes ago, Sly said:

Next season will be interesting. 
 

Conte is already improving Spurs. 
 

Klopps’ Liverpool are a really, really good team.

 

Tuchel has a Chelsea team that have proven they can beat the best. 

 

I don’t think Howe is the man to finish the Newcastle job, however he’ll improve them before the next person picks up the reigns. 
 

Say what you want about about being a Lego man and grade B / fake Pep, however Arteta is doing a solid job at Arsenal, they’re improving. 

 

Then we have Leicester, a team that is a threat to all of the above. A team that has shown we can upset the odds and be the  feared underdog. 
 

This is why the Premier League is the best league in football. 

 

 

 

Agree largely but you've missed West Ham - they are top 10 to stay. So are Everton. Their stadium will be a game changer for them. The size of stadium also helps west ham too. 

 

We are under real pressure to remain relevant at the right end of competitions. We are without doubt the most vulnerable.

 

I do think, after the 10 clubs listed plus Villa too, the others could be cut off unless they attract new investors., 

[Spudulike]

So very important to get the new East Stand built and the other infrastructure. It will secure the clubs place in the upper echelons. 

[Sly]

6 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Agree largely but you've missed West Ham - they are top 10 to stay. So are Everton. Their stadium will be a game changer for them. The size of stadium also helps west ham too. 

 

We are under real pressure to remain relevant at the right end of competitions. We are without doubt the most vulnerable.

 

I do think, after the 10 clubs listed plus Villa too, the others could be cut off unless they attract new investors., 

Very true. 
 

It’s a billionaires club in reality and others will end up picking up the other clubs at some point. 
 

Leeds, Wolves, Forest, Derby or Sheffield Wednesday could be a major force with some real backing.
 

A billionaire would be better buying a Championship team in a way, as they can throw money at it and achieve success quite quickly. 
 

[urban.spaceman]

54 minutes ago, Tommy Fresh said:

Additionally how many other clubs are part of the City Group? I imagine that helps massively in terms of scouting and bringing through better youngsters also means they they can sign and loan players out all over the world.

 

The set up in general is miles ahead of United and Chelsea 

Man City

Melbourne City

Montevideo City Torque

Troyes AC

Lommel SK

New York City FC (80%)

Mumbai City FC (65%)

Girona FC (47%)

Sichuan Jiuniu F.C. (29.7%)
Yokohama F. Marinos (20%)

 

[KingsX]

1 hour ago, Tommy Fresh said:

how many other clubs are part of the City Group? I imagine that helps massively in terms of scouting and bringing through better youngsters also means they they can sign and loan players out all over the world.

 

The set up in general is miles ahead of United and Chelsea 

 

2 hours ago, Finnegan said:

There's a ceiling to what even they can spend. United and Chelsea can effectively match it, or match it enough to compete blow for blow. Even Liverpool have enough resources to essentially buy most of the world's best players and eventually Newcastle WILL get there. 

 

The only thing that makes Man City so much stronger at the moment is probably the best manager of this century. 

 

He won't be there much longer. We'll see how they cope with someone else in charge. 

 

IMO, it ain’t just Pep.  In this era of extreme pressing football, a coach who can implement it and motivate players to sacrifice for it is only part of the deal. 

 

It seems players can’t play that kind of football at the highest level for more than a few years.  Or you can’t motivate them to keep doing it - when they’d rather approach their late 20s and fattest contract, with miles left in their legs.

 

So you also need a top setup to turn over the squad, without loss of quality, every 3 or 4 years.  An obscene second string, elite youth stashed everywhere, and huge money to fill any gaps with readymade stars.

 

Chelsea and PSG have the near-unlimited resources -- Man U too, if the Glazers didn’t loot the club.  But as of today, only Man City have the combination of resources and organization to make it work year after year in the long run.

 

No, it ain’t just Pep.  And (sadly?) there will be no more Fergies.

[SemperEadem]

43 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Man City

Melbourne City

Montevideo City Torque

Troyes AC

Lommel SK

New York City FC (80%)

Mumbai City FC (65%)

Girona FC (47%)

Sichuan Jiuniu F.C. (29.7%)
Yokohama F. Marinos (20%)

 

So wrong 

[Tommy Fresh]

56 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

Man City

Melbourne City

Montevideo City Torque

Troyes AC

Lommel SK

New York City FC (80%)

Mumbai City FC (65%)

Girona FC (47%)

Sichuan Jiuniu F.C. (29.7%)
Yokohama F. Marinos (20%)

 

Exactly they're on a different level to everyone else, look at the squad of Lommel SK made up of Man City loanees or random youngsters from all over who they've probably paid decent fees for. I'd imagine if these turn out any decent they'll end up at Man City or they'll just cash in on them.

[Tommy Fresh]

32 minutes ago, KingsX said:

 

 

IMO, it ain’t just Pep.  In this era of extreme pressing football, a coach who can implement it and motivate players to sacrifice for it is only part of the deal. 

 

It seems players can’t play that kind of football at the highest level for more than a few years.  Or you can’t motivate them to keep doing it - when they’d rather approach their late 20s and fattest contract, with miles left in their legs.

 

So you also need a top setup to turn over the squad, without loss of quality, every 3 or 4 years.  An obscene second string, elite youth stashed everywhere, and huge money to fill any gaps with readymade stars.

 

Chelsea and PSG have the near-unlimited resources -- Man U too, if the Glazers didn’t loot the club.  But as of today, only Man City have the combination of resources and organization to make it work year after year in the long run.

 

No, it ain’t just Pep.  And (sadly?) there will be no more Fergies.

I agree with this, the scale of the City Group makes it a different beast to just a club having financial backing and a good manager. Of course Pep is a factor in terms of day to day with the first team and probably attracting first teamers but over the coming years anyone will be able to walk in to Man City and probably pick up a few titles with the set up they've implemented not just within the club itself but across the world.

[urban.spaceman]

31 minutes ago, Tommy Fresh said:

Exactly they're on a different level to everyone else, look at the squad of Lommel SK made up of Man City loanees or random youngsters from all over who they've probably paid decent fees for. I'd imagine if these turn out any decent they'll end up at Man City or they'll just cash in on them.

Absolutely - they paid Fulham £12m for Patrick Roberts in 2015, then tried to factor him into the Mahrez deal in January 2017 while he was on loan at Celtic with Brendan. Since then he’s still a Man City player but has gone on loan at Norwich, Boro, Derby, before that was Girona who they own, now he’s at Troyes II. 
 

With talent they develop like Senior Man they’re happy to sell but put in a buy back clause which I think has expired now.