James Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ally Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. Why is he below average? Because we had a couple of good seasons 10 years ago, and we haven't lived up to it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. I'll play along......... What makes you think I have any interest in these stats? Have I ever posted them or even responded to them? Since you point out Shephard is an average Chairman are you suggesting I believe he's a great Chairman? Where have I ever said Shepherd is a great Chairman? Next..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. Why is he below average? Because we had a couple of good seasons 10 years ago, and we haven't lived up to it? Because his results have been worse than the average results during the history of NUFC. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. I'll play along......... What makes you think I have any interest in these stats? Have I ever posted them or even responded to them? Since you point out Shephard is an average Chairman are you suggesting I believe he's a great Chairman? Where have I ever said Shepherd is a great Chairman? Next..... Do you not use Shepherd's average league form as a reason to defend him? Or maybe that is someone else. Regardless, I thought it was a fact worth pointing out to those who feel that Shepherd is a better chairman than all of those we have had in our history. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ We are the 6th best team in England ever when looking at all-time top-flight point haul. That means that as we have come an average of 8th/9th under Shepherd, that would say that his chairmanship has been below average. I think you're confused again.... Where exactly am I confused? Our average position under Shepherd has been 8.5th, while we feature at 6th place in the all-time top-flight league table. That means that Shepherd has been a below average Newcastle chairman. I'll play along......... What makes you think I have any interest in these stats? Have I ever posted them or even responded to them? Since you point out Shephard is an average Chairman are you suggesting I believe he's a great Chairman? Where have I ever said Shepherd is a great Chairman? Next..... Do you not use Shepherd's average league form as a reason to defend him? Or maybe that is someone else. Regardless, I thought it was a fact worth pointing out to those who feel that Shepherd is a better chairman than all of those we have had in our history. mackems.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 Against the actual big boys (Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man Utd) We've already picked up 5 points and we're still to play a few of them. Still not bad. Agreed. I just can't imagine where spurs and Blackburn came from. Most odd. If by "big boys", we mean last season's top 6 of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs & Blackburn... Now what part of that is so hard to understand? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gray Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 spurs and blackburn? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeToon Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 Against the actual big boys (Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man Utd) We've already picked up 5 points and we're still to play a few of them. Still not bad. Agreed. I just can't imagine where spurs and Blackburn came from. Most odd. If by "big boys", we mean last season's top 6 of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs & Blackburn... Now what part of that is so hard to understand? Apparently, it's the "last season's top 6" part... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest nearlynearly Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 If by "big boys", we mean last season's top 6 of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs & Blackburn... Man U 2-0 NUFC L'pool 2-0 NUFC Arsenal 1-1 NUFC Blackburn 1-3 NUFC Chelsea 1-0 NUFC NUFC 3-1 Spurs NUFC 2-2 Man U Spurs 2-3 NUFC NUFC 2-1 L'pool P9, W4, D2, L3, F 14, A13, Pts 14. Pretty respectable. Aye man but we are now satisfied with respectable What aboot when that lot were was including us lot? If wah not careful we will be permanaently mid table plodders Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted February 11, 2007 Share Posted February 11, 2007 They finished above us, so they must be better, no? Therefore in theory, technically etc. they are better than us. And picking up results against teams finishing above us last season is an improvement. Obviously in reality terms I think otherwise but in that sense it's true. He said "big boys" meaning the big clubs that consistently finish above us, not a couple of clubs that have done it once or twice in 15 years. ^-^ At no point does he state that, to be frank. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPL Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 Against the actual big boys (Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea, Man Utd) We've already picked up 5 points and we're still to play a few of them. Still not bad. Agreed. I just can't imagine where spurs and Blackburn came from. Most odd. If by "big boys", we mean last season's top 6 of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs & Blackburn... Now what part of that is so hard to understand? WUM's tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crumpy Gunt Posted February 12, 2007 Share Posted February 12, 2007 If by "big boys", we mean last season's top 6 of Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, Arsenal, Spurs & Blackburn... Man U 2-0 NUFC L'pool 2-0 NUFC Arsenal 1-1 NUFC Blackburn 1-3 NUFC Chelsea 1-0 NUFC NUFC 3-1 Spurs NUFC 2-2 Man U Spurs 2-3 NUFC NUFC 2-1 L'pool P9, W4, D2, L3, F 14, A13, Pts 14. Pretty respectable. We seem to raise our game when playing the bigger clubs. Why can't we beat the Fulham's of the world? Because against the 'big' clubs the players motivate themselves - it proves 100% that Roeder is having trouble lifting the players when we can't beat Brum over 180 mins and the game v Fulham we were fucking awful for all but the last few minutes (nobby) conceeding an average of 2 goals per game since Boxing Day. It's why Roeder should be given his cards when the final bal lof this season is kicked Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now