Dave 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Someone give me 4/1 that we'll finish in a higher position with more points and we'll score less than last season and I'll put £25 on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 That finished above* us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 WBA and ourselves scored more than Spurs last season, does that mean we both have better attacking teams than them? Wrong tense. If that's the case shouldn't both teams concentrate on buying more defenders if we've got an attack better than the 5th place club?! Wrong tense again, but maybe we should be less blasé about the defence. They've generally been praised (Coloccini, Enrique, and I'll include Tiote here) or deemed as adequate (Williamson, Simpson), but last year I don't remember quite so many complaints about lack of protection from the midfield that we've had for many previous years (as well as Tiote, Gutierrez and Barton are considered as decent at protecting the defence, and Carroll was good at defending set pieces). Yet last year we conceded only 2 less than in our relegation season, and equalled our 3rd worst total in the Premiership years (17 of them). This year we will very likely be losing one of the better members of that defence. But I digress. The fact is, people are getting all excited about how great we're going to be next year with our all new attacking setup. Ben Arfa is going to take to his new position in a new team in a new league like a fish to water as are all the other new signings. Yet noone has any confidence whatsoever that we can actually score more goals than we did last year with only half a season of Carroll, and Nolan slowing us down simply because last year we had some "freak" results which we might not get next year? Of course we might not, then again there may be more "freak" results, but that's why it's a gamble. I fail to see why if people truly believe we have improved as a team so will have more possession, and improved as an attacking force with more scoring options, that it's such an obviously bad bet to take. Are all the other teams spending loads on their defences to stop us scoring next year? Sunderland have spent a bit I guess and we got 6 off them, but it's largely been derided as a bad move, so that can't be it can it? Is what people are getting excited about really just that we'll hopefully have better possession stats? Because I can tell you now that you wont be getting excited watching the game with great possession stats and no goals. I don't even think we were that bad last year in most games possession-wise? If there were somewhere you could get reliable possession stats I might even be tempted to offer up a bet on that. We're supposed to be improving, and moving forward as a team/squad. Apparently you do that by being happy to score less goals as long as you improve your possession stats, and hope your defence (the same defence or potentially weaker) is a lot better at defending teams on the break than teams controlling more of the possession. Until now, it's the first I've really heard of people thinking the team will be better next year because we'll concede less goals tbh. Not convinced. Most of those stats posted above are from years where we finished below mid table btw, so if the aim is to finish above 10th, then we should really be doing better than an average of those. My problem with what you're saying is that you've stripped it down in the most simplistic way possible and yes I do think it's possible to improve our attack, finish higher up the league while scoring less goals and conceding the same amount in the process. Here's another example, if you throw the last game of the season in with the other 5 I mentioned earlier it gives you 27 goals in 6 games, yet in the other 32 games we only managed 28 goals, that just confirms to me what I witnessed this season that a few freakish results have knocked peoples perceptions of our attacking ability compared to the majority of games. 27 in 6 is an amazing stat, yet 28 in 32 is terrible when you think about it and to me this is why our attack hasn't been great or better than Spurs this season, or the Robson 2004 season etc. When it's stripped down like that over 80% of the time we've been poor attack wise. So this season we may only score 50 goals but as long as we average it out better over the season and become consistent scorers then for me we've improved our attack, I also think that by becoming more consistent scorers we can pick up more points in games we've dominated but struggled to break down in the final 3rd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
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...
Optimistic Nut 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...
Recommended Posts