Jump to content
Newcastle-Online

Alan Pardew

Mike

by Mike
in Football

 Share

Recommended Posts

alexthegreat

alexthegreat

Posted
Posted

 

Calm Down Petal  :lol:

 

You get what you pay for pretty much - fair enough there might be the odd anomaly - but generally the rule of thumb is correct.

 

There's generally a reason why a player who costs £0.5m costs that much - and if you think our squad is really that valuable - apart from the obvious clues on the pitch - just take a look at the bench.

 

and before you start talking utter rubbish about what players are ''worth'' against what they cost - think about it for a second.

 

There's a reason they are still playing for one of the least ambitious teams in the country.

 

(I mean this season - our best player has been a loanee ffs, that's mackemesque!)

 

Terrible post, you've lamely skirted around all the issues I raised with your "point"

 

Here look : http://www.transferleague.co.uk/ on the front page there is a table of premier league squads valued by transfer fees paid.

 

Funnily: Were 8th.

 

So even by your own conditions you are still wrong.

 

In that table the amount separating 12 places from Villa (7th) to Palace (20th) is just £72m.

 

The amount separating the one place from Villa (7th) to Arsenal (6th) is £89m.

 

Clearly the top 6 is a cut above EVERYONE else in the league and the rest are all very much in similar boats.

 

http://i42.tinypic.com/w811yx.jpg

 

There's a valid argument that 7th to 12th should form a group in the middle of the table distinct from the bottom 8, and Newcastle should be in that group.

 

Interesting post.

 

Seeing as we don't seem to have the resources to get in the top 6, and have consistently shown form that would see us finish about 8th since January (if maintained across a season), then what would be the point in sacking the manager?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dave

Dave

Posted
Posted
"You just have to be strong, and be bold in your own opinions of what you're doing. Since I've been here, I like to think I've set teams up to play an attractive style of football and win games on the front foot.

 

"At the back end of last year, I thought we got ourselves into a position where it was difficult to set teams up like that because I didn't think we were carrying enough threat."

 

Righto Alan.

Link to post
Share on other sites
alexf

alexf

Posted
Posted

"You just have to be strong, and be bold in your own opinions of what you're doing. Since I've been here, I like to think I've set teams up to play an attractive style of football and win games on the front foot.

 

"At the back end of last year, I thought we got ourselves into a position where it was difficult to set teams up like that because I didn't think we were carrying enough threat."

 

Righto Alan.

 

Aye, it was only towards the back end of last year Alan :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Away Toon

Away Toon

Posted
Posted

I think we all know that we have a starting 11 inferior to the top six, but would like to think we were competitive with most of the others. IMO if you compare Everton's starting 11 with ours, apart from Krul maybe for Howard, and Cabaye somewhere in their midfield, none of the rest of our players would start for them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
BrettNUFC

BrettNUFC

Posted
Posted

I think we all know that we have a starting 11 inferior to the top six, but would like to think we were competitive with most of the others. IMO if you compare Everton's starting 11 with ours, apart from Krul maybe for Howard, and Cabaye somewhere in their midfield, none of the rest of our players would start for them.

 

:dowie:

 

Even Krul is a 'maybe' and Cabaye just 'somewhere'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bimpy474

Guest bimpy474

Posted
Posted

"Since I've been here, I like to think I've set teams up to play an attractive style of football and win games on the front foot"

 

Well he has, in his mind he has. It just doesn't quite look the same to everyone else :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Face

Happy Face

Posted
Posted

 

Calm Down Petal  :lol:

 

You get what you pay for pretty much - fair enough there might be the odd anomaly - but generally the rule of thumb is correct.

 

There's generally a reason why a player who costs £0.5m costs that much - and if you think our squad is really that valuable - apart from the obvious clues on the pitch - just take a look at the bench.

 

and before you start talking utter rubbish about what players are ''worth'' against what they cost - think about it for a second.

 

There's a reason they are still playing for one of the least ambitious teams in the country.

 

(I mean this season - our best player has been a loanee ffs, that's mackemesque!)

 

Terrible post, you've lamely skirted around all the issues I raised with your "point"

 

Here look : http://www.transferleague.co.uk/ on the front page there is a table of premier league squads valued by transfer fees paid.

 

Funnily: Were 8th.

 

So even by your own conditions you are still wrong.

 

Looks legit :anguish:

 

Ehh yeah.

 

Oh look: transfermarkt rates our squad as the 8th most valuable too.

http://www.transfermarkt.com/en/premier-league/gruendungsdaten/wettbewerb_GB1.html

 

A whole 50 million ahead of Sunderland in 9th.

 

What's an acceptable source to you, just HappyFace?

 

I used your source man!!  :lol:

 

Your new source helps your argument a little, putting Newcastle and Everton on a plateau well below the top 6, but slightly above the rest of the league....

 

http://i43.tinypic.com/2l9jviv.jpg

 

I'm disinclined to give much credence to either though, given the discrepancy between the values they place on Everton and Villa for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Face

Happy Face

Posted
Posted

Strange that so much credence is given to the Pardew bashing numbers saying we should be 8th best according to the value of our squad, but put those numbers into the context a graph offers, that challenges the extent of Pardew's advantage, and they're dismissed as tedious.

 

:whistle:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Face

Happy Face

Posted
Posted

 

Strange that so much credence is given to the Pardew bashing numbers saying we should be 8th best according to the value of our squad, but put those numbers into the context a graph offers, that challenges the extent of Pardew's advantage, and they're dismissed as tedious.

 

:whistle:

 

No offence but the graphs/pie charts/stats are just horrendously tedious. We all watch football and draw our own conclusions based on that. There is no stat for team cohesion, attacking intent, fluidity. You just watch the games and make up your mind. A while ago James perch got a 100% pass completion rate for us. Does that mean he's a great passer? No. The data does not show any situational factors .

 

It's not match related data.  It's some websites opinion on squad values. 

 

I said I place no credence in the data whatsoever.  But if people ARE going to quote it as evidence of managerial short comings, then it's fair game to contextualise it in response.  I never went and got a load of boring old data and made an argument and backed it up with a graph.  Someone else sourced the (make believe) data and used it to criticise Pardew with little objection.  Only when i look more closely at it does there seem to be a backlash against how boring it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spudil

Spudil

Posted
Posted

 

It's not match related data.  It's some websites opinion on squad values. 

 

I said I place no credence in the data whatsoever. But if people ARE going to quote it as evidence of managerial short comings, then it's fair game to contextualise it in response.  I never went and got a load of boring old data and made an argument and backed it up with a graph. Someone else sourced the (make believe) data and used it to criticise Pardew with little objection.  Only when i look more closely at it does there seem to be a backlash against how boring it is.

 

What on earth are you talking about? Do you live in your own world like? None if this happened ffs.

 

Here is what happened:

 

1)Haris Vuckis laughed at the suggestion that we probally have the 8th most valuable squad in the league.

2)I called him out on it

3)He said "we def dont have the 8th most valuable based on spend, we spend nothing"

4)I provided sources valuing us as the 8th most valuable based on an objective estimation and based on transfer fees paid.

 

 

Your new source helps your argument a little, putting Newcastle and Everton on a plateau well below the top 6, but slightly above the rest of the league....

 

Helps my argument a little :lol: the argument I was having has been 99% won already unless HV gets some sources valuing our squad at well below eight.

 

And that source puts us at 50 odd million ahead of Sunderland in 9th, a bit more that "slightly" above them.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Happy Face

Happy Face

Posted
Posted

 

It's not match related data.  It's some websites opinion on squad values. 

 

I said I place no credence in the data whatsoever. But if people ARE going to quote it as evidence of managerial short comings, then it's fair game to contextualise it in response.  I never went and got a load of boring old data and made an argument and backed it up with a graph. Someone else sourced the (make believe) data and used it to criticise Pardew with little objection.  Only when i look more closely at it does there seem to be a backlash against how boring it is.

 

What on earth are you talking about? Do you live in your own world like? None if this happened ffs.

 

Here is what happened:

 

1)Haris Vuckis laughed at the suggestion that we probally have the 8th most valuable squad in the league.

2)I called him out on it

3)He said "we def dont have the 8th most valuable based on spend, we spend nothing"

4)I provided sources valuing us as the 8th most valuable based on an objective estimation and based on transfer fees paid.

 

 

Your new source helps your argument a little, putting Newcastle and Everton on a plateau well below the top 6, but slightly above the rest of the league....

 

Helps my argument a little :lol: the argument I was having has been 99% won already unless HV gets some sources valuing our squad at well below eight.

 

And that source puts us at 50 odd million ahead of Sunderland in 9th, a bit more that "slightly" above them.

 

Your sources disagree wildly though. 

 

In one case Everton have the 7th most valuable squad. In the other they're 12th.

 

Similar story with villa.

 

How much stock you can place in that is debateable.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Spudil

Spudil

Posted
Posted

Jesus man

 

1 is based on transfer fees paid (transferleague.co.uk)

 

the other is based on an objective estimation (transfermarkt)

 

Of course they vary.

 

Everton, for example, have the 12th most valuable squad baseed on transfer fees paid, but transfermarkt rightly values their squad at 7th based on an objective estimation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TRon

TRon

Posted
Posted

If people are going to argue a point about the value of our squad I don't see how anyone can have a problem with some numbers showing how much it's actually worth.

 

You can use stats any way that you want. The Cabaye valuation at £4.5m is a case in point. Somewhere down the line you have to use some common sense to draw a conclusion from it, and this is where there is disagreement and in some cases deliberate distortion to support a viewpoint which flies in the face of what we are all seeing with our own eyes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...