Robin1988 Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 1 hour ago, ChippenhamRed said: 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. There was a list of players, certainly by the time the playing staff (not players) went on holiday. Cotterill's job was not to recruit players, in the same way Johnson's isn't. He identifies them and attempts to convince them to sign, but only after the board have got their finger out and got them down to Bristol. This is where we fell apart in the summer. There weren't players down in Bristol being wooed or otherwise by Cotterill. There were players identified, but the all-important bit never happened. Even if you don't believe me or anyone else who says it that we actually know, use your mind and think logically about why the summer panned out the way it did. We were playing catch-up the whole way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderCraig Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 On 3/23/2016 at 13:26, KevinWellRed said: Afternoon gents, Please indulge a stat geek here for just a second. Below is a picture of our points return this season vs. the number of games played. I've added a few extra bits to it that make for some very interesting reading; let me explain: The purple dashed line is an estimation of how many points we'd be looking at if we'd kept Cottrill. It's been done by eye, so this is obviously pretty inaccurate, but interesting all the same. The green dotted line is a projection of where we might be based on LJ's points return per game (62.5%) which is where things get really juicy. I've marked where Burnley, Brighton and the bottom of the play-off places (Sheff Wed) are - putting us right in the mix of it had we been playing with this form since the start of the season. Obviously you have to take all this with a pinch of salt. Factors like Tomlin's arrival and changing to four at the back (after Cottrill's departure - marked as a red dotted line) all have a part to play. Either way I think it makes for some interesting analysis. Anything anyone would like to see added to the graph? Any general improvements? BEWARE: Not Suitable For Work (VERY Graphic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 18 hours ago, KevinWellRed said: 20,582 posts and 1,232 likes - you don't need a graph to show those are shite numbers. Yes, but you need a graph to see the trend. Are RR's posts getting more popular? Or less? I think we should be told... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderInACan Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 You may have all converted me away from ice cream but you'll never take away my POPCORN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CyderInACan Posted March 24, 2016 Report Share Posted March 24, 2016 3 minutes ago, CyderInACan said: You may have all converted me away from ice cream but you'll never take away my POPCORN ***********POP*************** (corn) * *for anyone who remembers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderingred Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 3 hours ago, CyderInACan said: ***********POP*************** (corn) * *for anyone who remembers I remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1ackbird Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 It looks like Plymouth might be *****POP***** ing again, if Rovers have anything to do with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 14 hours ago, Aizoon said: Yes, but you need a graph to see the trend. Are RR's posts getting more popular? Or less? I think we should be told... That'll be the zzzzzzz graph then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted March 25, 2016 Admin Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 On 3/23/2016 at 22:56, KevinWellRed said: 20,582 posts and 1,232 likes - you don't need a graph to show those are shite numbers. To be fair to Robbored, the vast majority of his posts date back to before "likes" were even a twinkling in Mark Zuckerberg's eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 1 hour ago, downendcity said: That'll be the zzzzzzz graph then? More like: zz zzzz zzzz z z zzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 18 minutes ago, Ian M said: To be fair to Robbored, the vast majority of his posts date back to before "likes" were even a twinkling in Mark Zuckerberg's eyes. There are samples and then there are populations, poor samples are chosen all the time and believed to represent the population, one of the little holes that many people fall into all the time when using statistics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RED4LIFE Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 The first rule of OTIB club: Robbored is a WUM The second rule of OTIB club: Don't feed the troll Robbored is the reason the ignore button was invented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellfire Corner Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 4 hours ago, Aizoon said: More like: zz zzzz zzzz z z zzz That looks like a 2 4 5 4 formation with "z" playing in every position. We might get away with playing 15 players, but 2 goalkeepers????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted March 25, 2016 Report Share Posted March 25, 2016 On 23 mars 2016 at 23:56, KevinWellRed said: 20,582 posts and 1,232 likes - you don't need a graph to show those are shite numbers. But were they better under Cotterill's management ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.