|
|
Post by Kenilworth_Stokies on May 5, 2016 11:30:00 GMT
While it feels like this season has become a bit of a damp squib, with league position not reflecting fan expectations, it's interesting to see that we are the second best placed club in the value for money per league position graph (taken from the BBC website) after Leicester City:  A waste of money underachieving squad would be in the top right, a bargain over-achieving squad would be in the bottom left. If league position directly reflected squad cost then all the clubs in this graph would be on a neat line top left to bottom right. We're low cost but mid-table. So even at 10th it appears Mark Hughes has over achieved with the value of the squad at his disposal. Thoughts? |
|
|
|
Post by Godo on May 5, 2016 12:23:23 GMT
Can we really draw that conclusion? Surely looking at the relevant league position and outlay on players Tottenham would be the 2nd best perfoming? They've outcompeted clubs like Man City, the Shit, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea who have spent a lot more and significantly outperformed clubs like Newcastle etc. who have spent similar amounts. If the final league pay out and Champions league pay outs are measured as a profit against amount spent on players they would outperform us by a considerable margin........
They are also one of the few squads in the league where the re-sale value of their squad would be considerably higher than the amount paid out. Not sure what the re-sale value of our team would be compared with outlay but, Butland aside, I reckon we'd be in a considerable deficit despite the relatively modest amounts spent.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisparker on May 5, 2016 12:24:32 GMT
Sparky massively overachieved last season imo with the squad he had, especially after injuries to Bojan & Moses. I was expecting us to stall somewhere around 45 points last season but we somehow managed to get to 54 & deservedly so. This season a lot of people, including myself, were expecting that we would beat that tally but it was never going to be easy especially after losing our best player from last season.
But the way we were going until the end of January it seemed like we could even manage 60 points but we seemed to have lost our way a little bit & now that we know it's not going to happen, we can put it down to a number of factors - a plethora of injuries, players not turning up after Christmas, unsettled backline, some of the manager's tactical decisions, home crowd being terrible constantly etc. But it has still been a very good season & we certainly have made some progress, especially away from home.
We've reached the point where if we're to improve each season, we need to have a little bit of luck with injuries & so on. One or 2 more additions to the squad & we'd be on the same level as the likes of Southampton. But Hughes is doing a great job & long may it continue...
|
|
|
|
Post by Kenilworth_Stokies on May 5, 2016 12:31:20 GMT
Can we really draw that conclusion? Surely looking at the relevant league position and outlay on players Tottenham would be the 2nd best perfoming? They've outcompeted clubs like Man City, the Shit, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea who have spent a lot more and significantly outperformed clubs like Newcastle etc. who have spent similar amounts. If the final league pay out and Champions league pay outs are measured as a profit against amount spent on players they would outperform us by a considerable margin........ They are also one of the few squads in the league where the re-sale value of their squad would be considerably higher than the amount paid out. Not sure what the re-sale value of our team would be compared with outlay but, Butland aside, I reckon we'd be in a considerable deficit despite the relatively modest amounts spent. Depends how you measure it. We are the second lowest spending team to be highest up the table. We're in the same diagonal 'value for money' stripe as the likes of West Ham, Arsenal, Tottenham and Southampton. And of that lot we've spent the least, other than Leicester. |
|
