Disco Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Can we not just make a "shit bets between users" thread? Log in expecting (fuck knows why) to see some progress on the transfer field and instead I'm treated to this guff. Howay man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hanshithispantz Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 We clearly were not better than 12th, otherwise we wouldn't have finished 12th. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 God, I hate lulls in the transfer window. Same. Even worse when there's no (proper) summer tournament. I've already copywrited the above post. Agreed though, its ball achingly dull at the moment. At least the friendlies start again this weekend. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Fwiw, the stat that is most predictive about a team's quality is goal difference. We were -1, pretty average last year but better than teams that finished below us, which means that if the season was replayed with the same players, we would most likely finish higher. This is statistics and normal distribution etc. We were better than 12th last year. Wasn't about team quality mate, was about quality of the attack... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Man Utd scored 18 goals more the season after they sold Ronaldo & Tevez so guess that means their attack was much much better without those two. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Long story short. Last season we may have excelled at something that was certain teams weakness, ie set pieces with Carroll/Nolan/Ameobi. So in those games we maximised our strength and scored lots because of it. This season we will hopefully be able to outplay more sides in open play using creativity, which is all teams weakness. Leading to better results against more sides, whilst potentially scoring less. The 2nd style of attacking is more effective against the majority than the others, which is what the league is about. Getting the best results against the majority. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Can we not just make a "shit bets between users" thread? Bet it won't happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Fwiw, the stat that is most predictive about a team's quality is goal difference. We were -1, pretty average last year but better than teams that finished below us, which means that if the season was replayed with the same players, we would most likely finish higher. This is statistics and normal distribution etc. We were better than 12th last year. Wasn't about team quality mate, was about quality of the attack... I might have 'stars in my eyes' but the sheer fact we have a fit Ben Arfa on the pitch improves the quality of the attack. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Fwiw, the stat that is most predictive about a team's quality is goal difference. We were -1, pretty average last year but better than teams that finished below us, which means that if the season was replayed with the same players, we would most likely finish higher. This is statistics and normal distribution etc. We were better than 12th last year. Wasn't about team quality mate, was about quality of the attack... I might have 'stars in my eyes' but the sheer fact we have a fit Ben Arfa on the pitch improves the quality of the attack. He was here last season in case you didn't know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a fucking liability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? Also: you didn't think so this time last year: http://www.newcastle-online.org/nufcforum/index.php/topic,65378.msg2427445.html#msg2427445 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Fwiw, the stat that is most predictive about a team's quality is goal difference. We were -1, pretty average last year but better than teams that finished below us, which means that if the season was replayed with the same players, we would most likely finish higher. This is statistics and normal distribution etc. We were better than 12th last year. Wasn't about team quality mate, was about quality of the attack... I might have 'stars in my eyes' but the sheer fact we have a fit Ben Arfa on the pitch improves the quality of the attack. He was here last season in case you didn't know. 3 and a 1/2 games man! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Consortium of one Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 God, I hate lulls in the transfer window. Lull? Lull? How can you say it is a lull? More like a temporary lack of movement if you ask me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? What a stupid question. EDIT - Rating him when he came from Arsenal doesn't make his statement about him being a liability last season any less true. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Fwiw, the stat that is most predictive about a team's quality is goal difference. We were -1, pretty average last year but better than teams that finished below us, which means that if the season was replayed with the same players, we would most likely finish higher. This is statistics and normal distribution etc. We were better than 12th last year. Wasn't about team quality mate, was about quality of the attack... I might have 'stars in my eyes' but the sheer fact we have a fit Ben Arfa on the pitch improves the quality of the attack. He was here last season in case you didn't know. 3 and a 1/2 games man! Are you suggesting injuries won't happen next season? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? What a stupid question. Then answer it if you can. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Logic Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? No denying we're a body down, but my post was accuarate in that he was a liability. On that alone we can be no worse off as when he played he almost guaranteed the opposition a goal. I think he only had one decent game where he never made an error. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? What a stupid question. Then answer it if you can. You already answered it in a previous post in the quote. In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? No denying we're a body down, but my post was accuarate in that he was a liability. On that alone we can be no worse off as when he played he almost guaranteed the opposition a goal. I think he only had one decent game where he never made an error. Look up. You were quite impressed when we got him. Now, with the benefit of hindsight, some rewriting of history and some spin that no cover is better than available cover you have convinced yourself that we are no worse off. Well done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? What a stupid question. Then answer it if you can. You already answered it in a previous post in the quote. In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question. Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BooBoo Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster. I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I was quite pleased when we got Sol, but he was a disaster. I think in retrospect, on the odd time that he played, we would have been no worse off playing Kadar. Kadar who played the grant total of 1 competitive match last season, mainly due to injury problems? Correction: he played 3 competitive matches. The point largely stands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Speaks volumes that nobody will take his bet tbh. UV or Pip? I'd be more inclined to take Pips but neither are entirely dependent on the activity of NUFC so it's f***ing nonsense - last year was widely recognised as an anomalous year for a lot of teams and based on that, if we stick as we are in the market, i reckon we'll end up doing worse despite having some better players on the books I was referring to UV's proposal FWIW. Quite comical watching people try and squirm it into something else. On the contrary I think most of those other people have explained their reasoning very well. UV's shallow point-scoring exercise of counting goals rather than results is petty at best. It says more about those who want to support such a narrow argument than it does about those who are disputing it. To be fair, his bet was targeted at the supposed improved quality of our ATTACK. I would say goals scored is a pretty good measure for this, certainly better than the possession stat nonsense others have been coming up to counter his argument, wouldn't you agree? No I wouldn't. While Carroll is a formidable centre forward, I have never rated Nolan so highly and neither it seems have the rest of the premiership clubs. Carroll and Nolan did provide an effective Stoke-style partnership but it severely limited our passing game due to Nolan's lack of movement. As Baggio pointed out earlier, we scored more goals than Spurs, does that mean our attacking play was more effective than theirs? Yes, it means exactly that. Not sure how you could argue this... May not have been as pleasing on the eye as Barcelona style attacking, but effective it was. Would you rather we still had last years' team than the current one then (plus the two signings we are supposedly still to bring in)? As I've argued before and based on how it currently stands: a resounding yes. In attack, we have lost Carroll, by far our best and most promising striker, and got in Ba, somebody with a decent enough record but not at the same level. Conclusion: degression In midfield we have lost Nolan, our captain and scorer of many important goals for us in the last 2 seasons, and got in Cabaye and Marveaux, who look like good additions but have it all to prove in the Premiership. Conclusion: slight progress In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. Conclusion: slight degression. Overall: we have lost almost half of our goals from the past 2 seasons and brought in some promising players with a lot to prove at this level. So yes, I would take last year's squad over the current one. Speculating about the 2 players yet supposedly to come in and how they will affect the squad strength is pointless; they may or may not come (if you don't believe me, look up Pardew's statements in January about bringing in reinforcements), and we may just as well lose key players such as Tiote, Enrique and Barton before the end of the transfer window without replacing them, like we have done before multiple times. Like everybody else I will have to wait until the transfer window is shut to judge whether we have gone forward or backward, but right now I think people are kidding themselves if they think our squad is stronger than it was last season. Post falls down on that alone, Campbell proved to be a f***ing liability. Ridiculous statement. He was there as an option to bring on if we needed him. Who do you suggest we bring on now we need cover for centre back who we didn't have last season? What a stupid question. Then answer it if you can. You already answered it in a previous post in the quote. In defense we have lost cover in Campbell and not got anybody in. So if we've not brought anyone in at the back then nobody new can cover him obviously, which is why it was a stupid question. Isn't the stupidity originating from the person implicitly arguing the contrary, i.e. Mr Logic in this case? It was a stupid question asked by you that you already answered yourself earlier in the quote. I don't see him arguing the contrary either, unless he's saying a new player has come in to improve us in that position which I don't think he did. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts