Robin1988 Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, BigAlToby&Liam said: Since then we've improved enormously. Yes we have. Lee has done very well. Not without the kind of resources, Ashton-sourced, Cotterill was not able to access. 1 hour ago, Ivorguy said: We have no idea who SC's targets were or even if there were any ! Some do, and there were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chairman Mao Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 18 minutes ago, View from the Dolman said: Guess Bolton didn't get the memo... Or City in 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, Robbored said: You admit that your a geek but why produce it? It tells us nothing at all. I'd say the same of your posts but they tell us you're a sad old man with nothing better to do than spend your days trolling strangers. Well that's assuming they're lucky enough to not know you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 Geek head on. The sample size for LJ is not enough to draw any conclusions and the OP says 'take with a pinch of salt' Someone has forgotten that 'Correlation does not imply causation' Bottom line, you'd better off trying to prove that eating ice cream causes polio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robinreliant Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, BigAlToby&Liam said: Harshly treated? He had long enough to sort out his sorry mess. I'd say too long. Thank Christ he lost his mind and got the chop. Since then we've improved enormously. Although I liked Cotts I do believe that if he had remained with us we would have been pretty much relegated by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 38 minutes ago, Robbored said: My point is that we don't need "in depth analysis" to know why we've had an upturn in fortunes. It ain't rocket science ffs! Uummummmmmm you do get this is a Forum , right ? You tend to discuss , and yes analysis may come into it. But I may be wrong, what would you have if you took away all that ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 2 hours ago, Robbored said: You admit that your a geek but why produce it? It tells us nothing at all. Pretty much tells us we were going down Under Cotts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Dawe Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 51 minutes ago, Robbored said: My point is that we don't need "in depth analysis" to know why we've had an upturn in fortunes. It ain't rocket science ffs! You must be delighted with Lee's new drone up Failand then. That's sort of rocket science (isn't it?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderMB Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 3 hours ago, Robin1988 said: I still believe Cotterill was harshly treated since he was woefully backed in the transfer window, and for the moment at least, we've done the same thing we did when Cotts arrived, thrown money at the problem, which is working for the moment. I'm just waiting for the next cycle when the board aren't as well organised. Hopefully with Ashton here it's a way off yet. I couldn't agree more, but to play devil's advocate, Cotterill had already proven himself to be a good manager with promotion. If he wasn't backed sufficiently then he should have walked instead of trying to make it work. He'll still get work at the top end of League 1, but he had nothing to gain by staying. Even if by some fluke he'd kept us up and competitive, his bosses had shown their true colours (again), and given all the stuff we've heard from our past managers about how badly this club has been run I think he'd probably push his reputation further if he had just stepped down the second it became clear he wasn't getting his signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 All this SC wasn't backed in the transfer market , it was Cott's fault we didn't sign anyone, does anyone know with 100% certainty who was at fault ? I heard we went for stupid outlandish signings, but then I also heard we matched wages with Burnley, which if true kinda means it was just the player personal choice, and we did everything we could have. I've heard MA was involved during the good transfer window of 2014 , then not last year, and the signings started again on his return. So was Burt at fault or is Ashton a minor magician? All it took was SC to go and Pembo to step in. He made slight changes in formation and all of a sudden clean sheets appeared , along with points. LJ is getting plaudits , and rightly so , but Pembo deserves credit too. On the other side of the coin, SC's bloody mindedness and stubbornness ultimately led to his demise. Anyway back to the thread, I always enjoy stats. It gives you something to read when not watching games, it allows you to compare and contrast and gives you something to discuss. Which is handy , this being a forum and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadredfred Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 Nice analysis. It may highlight the obvious, and I also agree that LJ's input and average PPG could do with a little longer (be nice to see at end of season) but still a nice way of looking at it. As well as an average PPG projection for MK, Rotherham and Charlton (to give us more confidence that we'll beat the drop), I'd be interested to see the effect of a certain Mr Warnock since his arrival. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin1988 Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 hour ago, 1960maaan said: All this SC wasn't backed in the transfer market , it was Cott's fault we didn't sign anyone, does anyone know with 100% certainty who was at fault ? I heard we went for stupid outlandish signings, but then I also heard we matched wages with Burnley, which if true kinda means it was just the player personal choice, and we did everything we could have. People get way too hung up on Gayle and Gray. Why do you think we were trying to make such stupidly expensive signings in late August? Because the board hadn't got their act together. Even if Brian bloody Tinnion were in charge, he would have got a list of players together by mid-July. The delays were not Cotterill's doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Porter Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 A great graph. And here it is simplified Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderInACan Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 3 hours ago, bcfcfinker said: Geek head on. The sample size for LJ is not enough to draw any conclusions and the OP says 'take with a pinch of salt' Someone has forgotten that 'Correlation does not imply causation' Bottom line, you'd better off trying to prove that eating ice cream causes polio Well that's me and Ice Cream finished then if that's true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 3 hours ago, bcfcfinker said: Geek head on. The sample size for LJ is not enough to draw any conclusions and the OP says 'take with a pinch of salt' Someone has forgotten that 'Correlation does not imply causation' Bottom line, you'd better off trying to prove that eating ice cream causes polio So statistics can't be used for new situations? I personally think there are too many variables in this instance to say that LJ will succeed but I think that Cotts had enough time to show he was taking us down, be that his, or the boards fault. I also think statistics for stuff like this is absolutely rowlocks, no way of convincingly modelling for the variables. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 8 minutes ago, CyderInACan said: Well that's me and Ice Cream finished then if that's true. Vanilla I believe Got to remember that it was some Americans who came up with the correlation. Strange thing is, some still believe it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 6 minutes ago, RumRed said: So statistics can't be used for new situations? I personally think there are too many variables in this instance to say that LJ will succeed but I think that Cotts had enough time to show he was taking us down, be that his, or the boards fault. I also think statistics for stuff like this is absolutely rowlocks, no way of convincingly modelling for the variables. You said lots of impressive things without actually saying anything, except of course rowlocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 16 minutes ago, bcfcfinker said: You said lots of impressive things without actually saying anything, except of course rowlocks It's what I get paid to do, habit. Do you mind if I quote in my CV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 2 hours ago, 1960maaan said: All this SC wasn't backed in the transfer market , it was Cott's fault we didn't sign anyone, does anyone know with 100% certainty who was at fault ? I heard we went for stupid outlandish signings, but then I also heard we matched wages with Burnley, which if true kinda means it was just the player personal choice, and we did everything we could have. The only reason that matters in regard to SCs sacking was that SL was fed right up with SC not utilising the academy and wanting to sign players with big money. Lansdown lost faith in him and no doubt at all that when LJ was appointed it was made very clear to him the importance of bringing young players through. We've seen Vyner making his debut already. We all know that SLs dream is to reach the PL with a squad that has a decent number of home grown talent in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 Blimey I just liked a Robbored post, nurse please.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 6 minutes ago, RumRed said: Blimey I just liked a Robbored post, nurse please.. Surprising as it might be to you, I actually get quite a few "likes" so don't feel so bad. You're not alone..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinWellRed Posted March 23, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 minute ago, Robbored said: Surprising as it might be to you, I actually get quite a few "likes" so don't feel so bad. You're not alone..... 20,582 posts and 1,232 likes - you don't need a graph to show those are shite numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RumRed Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 1 minute ago, Robbored said: Surprising as it might be to you, I actually get quite a few "likes" so don't feel so bad. You're not alone..... I think you were spot on, it's just funny to take the pee. It seems you like that anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodogs Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 Kev just for Robs benefit please do a graph even Thatch has a better return:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 13 minutes ago, KevinWellRed said: 20,582 posts and 1,232 likes - you don't need a graph to show those are shite numbers. What do compare shite numbers to? Do you have a baseline figure? I love to know what it is..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 14 minutes ago, RumRed said: I think you were spot on, it's just funny to take the pee. It seems you like that anyway! Point is RR, I've had stick on here for years and it's never bothered me one bit. Sticks and stones and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodogs Posted March 23, 2016 Report Share Posted March 23, 2016 6 minutes ago, Robbored said: Point is RR, I've had stick on here for years and it's never bothered me one bit. Sticks and stones and all that. From what I've seen you enjoy it. I reckon you could start an argument with only you in the room Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 8 hours ago, twodogs said: From what I've seen you enjoy it. I reckon you could start an argument with only you in the room I don't "enjoy" it nor do I find it distasteful. It's others who post it so obviously some of my posts aggravate them to the point of where they can only responds with name calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 4 hours ago, Robbored said: I don't "enjoy" it nor do I find it distasteful. It's others who post it so obviously some of my posts aggravate them to the point of where they can only responds with name calling. Quite possibly because a number of your posts add nothing, and instead you troll people with crap like "who cares" and "zzzzz" which, let's be honest means you either do enjoy it, or you're desperate for the attention it brings when people respond. I'm well aware that a "zzzzz" or "who cares" is probably on its way in my direction now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChippenhamRed Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 15 hours ago, Robin1988 said: People get way too hung up on Gayle and Gray. Why do you think we were trying to make such stupidly expensive signings in late August? Because the board hadn't got their act together. Even if Brian bloody Tinnion were in charge, he would have got a list of players together by mid-July. The delays were not Cotterill's doing. How do you know there wasn't a list of players in mid-July? Maybe Cotterill had a list of players, attempted to recruit them, failed, and then as the new season drew nearer, the board sanctioned increasingly large offers as the need grew more urgent? Is it so unreasonable to seek what you perceive to be the best value first and then proceed to more expensive outlays should this fail? I don't see based on the available evidence that we can a) be certain the board is at fault or b) absolve Cotterill of any responsibility. Signing players is a collaborative effort between management and the board, so most likely it was a collaborative failure with partial blame on both sides - but we can't even say that for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.