New Manager Speculation

[bannedfromHandV]

23 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

The Transfermarket Value of Fulham and Wolves have gone up as the season has progressed, due to the form and performance of their players etc.

The ACTUAL value, as quoted from a few sources, has us with the most expensive squad, at the start.

Ours may have dropped due to shite like McCormack pretty much being a write off.

 

EDIT: Don't want it to seem like I am picking on your posts @bannedfromHandV lol.

It's just that you have the ones I want to comment on. (As I was looking at these lists a couple of days ago and one had us with the most expensive)

Surely then those values are more relevant in April than they are in August?

[HanoiVillan]

On 4/18/2018 at 10:09, sne said:

With Östersund now plunged into chaos after their chairman being arrested for potential financial misdoings there might be a chance of Graham Potter moving in the summer.

Would be a very exciting name IMO

'Graham Potter' is NOT an exciting name. 

Spoiler

Goaldinho O'Thrillinggame, now that would be an exciting name. 

 

[terrytini]

The idea that if you spend the most you “ should” finish top is flawed.

It certainly IS true that over time, significantly higher or lower  spending than rivals will lead to higher ( or lower, respectively) League positions.

But...

If one Club spend £280m, another £70m, another £60, and another £10m, it’s reasonable to expect the big spender to out perform the others, and the small spender to come last. But it’s NOT reasonable to assume the 2nd and 3rd highest must finish according to their spending, it’s not a big enough difference. And we certainly have NOT outspent other Clubs by a significant amount.

Secondly even with large differential spending its hard to properly make the call  that the biggest should be top dog. You’d need to take account of wages, loans, the state of the Clubs at any given start point for the comparison ( and even determining those start points will skew results). You’d need to allow for a single big money purchase that didn’t work out, or went missing for a long period through injury, to form a balanced view. Injuries generally will obviously affect results.

In my view the argument that Bruce “ should” have “done better” with “ the money we’ve spent” is hard to justify logically, with the 3 dubious parts in speech marks.

I don’t say this as a Pro, or Anti.....I’ve been both. But for me the case against is weak.

For “should”, see above, plus it’d be nice to at least hear an acknowledgment that such a view is entirely subjective ( so “ should” isn’t really appropriate)

For “ done better” I’d say the majority of people saying this are in one of two camps, either we’ve not got enough points ( in which case is it seriously suggested that 4 or 5 points separates a good job from one worth the sack !) or the “ quality” of the football. In this latter case it really has nothing to do with money, and much to do with what football one prefers.

For “ money we’ve spent”, see above.

He COULD have done better. He COULD have done worse. A new guy COULD do better, or worse.

After our first 7 games, that produced largely poor performances and a poor 7 points, I was perfectly comfortable that he shoukd go. Averaging one point per game when it needed to be close to 2. At that point I think it was very reasonable to argue that a new Manager was LIKELY to get more out of these players.

Im a long long way from being remotely certain that whatever new Manager we had appointed at that stage would have bettered Bruce’s return since then of 72 points from 36 games at an average of 2 per game.

To put it another way, if, after 7 games, someone had offered “ Bruce stays and gets 2 points per game, or a new guy” there’s no way I’d have said new guy.

So for me the only real question is “ do you think the guy that’s got 2 points a game for the last 36 games is significantly LESS likely to do that again than a currently unknown Manager ?”.

Thats for personal opinions, but I know in my case I don’t see how the answer can be that he is significantly less likely to do so.

Now, anyone that wants him gone because they prefer a different brand of football, or because they don’t like him, or whatever,  fine, that’s different.

 

[blandy]

1 hour ago, terrytini said:

for me the only real question is “ do you think the guy that’s got 2 points a game for the last 36 games is significantly LESS likely to do that again than a currently unknown Manager ?”.

Thats for personal opinions, but I know in my case I don’t see how the answer can be that he is significantly less likely to do so.

Now, anyone that wants him gone because they prefer a different brand of football, or because they don’t like him, or whatever,  fine, that’s different.

You make some good points, as per..Terry.

I wonder if the question is the right one, though. I'd phrase it differently. I'd ask whether, "based on his record with us to date, over the (nearly) 2 seasons Steve Bruce or someone else is more likely to be able to improve the results next season in order to get us the promotion we seek?"

So it's not just about what's happened in the past 36 games, it's about what's happened since Bruce got here with all the pros and cons (not just points per game) and weighing that set of known facts/data up against a guess as to how he'll do in the future and a guess as to how someone else will do in the future. Again, though I don't enjoy the style, if we stick to the point about promotion as an aim, then bluntly if someone assessed to be better/more likely to succeed is available, then get him in. Bruce has had a decent time and decent backing and a decent squad and was set the clear aim of "take us up".

[terrytini]

Agree

[AntrimBlack]

12 hours ago, bannedfromHandV said:

So you would look at Sunderlands squad, and think to yourself, 'man, that is a promotion winning team right there' right?

Or are you just applying the usual backward logic of high wages = good players?

Money does not equal success.

As I said - they spent badly - we didn't. Hence the huge difference in the league positions.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

[richp999]

Brendan Rodgers would have us flying. Would be awesome. 

Failing that I want Maradona. 

 

[Jareth]

10 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

As I said - they spent badly - we didn't. Hence the huge difference in the league positions.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

A competition between AVFC and Sunderland's ability to spend money efficiently is a bit like choosing who's best to sleep with from Theresa May or Bella Emberg.

[bannedfromHandV]

11 hours ago, AntrimBlack said:

As I said - they spent badly - we didn't. Hence the huge difference in the league positions.

What is so difficult to understand about that?

I didn't think we were debating how the money was spent.

You replied to my post asking should Sunderland's expectations be promotion simply for having a high wage bill to which you commented yes.

My point is that a high wage bill doesn't automatically dictate where a club should finish, money does not give you a right to achieve, it still has to be earned.

[AntrimBlack]

15 minutes ago, bannedfromHandV said:

I didn't think we were debating how the money was spent.

You replied to my post asking should Sunderland's expectations be promotion simply for having a high wage bill to which you commented yes.

My point is that a high wage bill doesn't automatically dictate where a club should finish, money does not give you a right to achieve, it still has to be earned.

Agreed.

[AntrimBlack]

It's Wenger!! It's written in the stars. It is known!

[villa89]

21 hours ago, terrytini said:

The idea that if you spend the most you “ should” finish top is flawed.

People obsess about transfer spend but if you want the best predictor of success you need to look at wage bills. It's been scientifically researched that having the highest wage bill is by far the most accurate predictor of league success in professional football. As an aside our wage bill is ~£52m a year which I would guess is the highest in the league.

[bannedfromHandV]

20 minutes ago, villa89 said:

People obsess about transfer spend but if you want the best predictor of success you need to look at wage bills. It's been scientifically researched that having the highest wage bill is by far the most accurate predictor of league success in professional football. As an aside our wage bill is ~£52m a year which I would guess is the highest in the league.

Where have you pulled the info/stats from out of interest?

[villa89]

1 minute ago, bannedfromHandV said:

Where have you pulled the info/stats from out of interest?

For the wage bill predictor I can't dig up a paper online but essentially I heard some Dr. talking about a paper he wrote in a radio interview. For the wage bill one of the journo's on the Sunday Supplement on sky who's a Villa fan and presumably is well informed said that the wage bill at Villa is £1m a week 

Not the best sources  

[pacbuddies]

Bruce out Wenger in. Make it happen Dr Tony!

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

2 hours ago, pacbuddies said:

Bruce out Wenger in. Make it happen Dr Tony!

Might fancy transforming a sleeping giant again hey?

[Rob182]

On 19/04/2018 at 12:56, bannedfromHandV said:

Birmingham offered Terry more than we did in terms of salary.

 

@DCJonah should perhaps have put that no other club could have ‘afforded’ him. Small Heath could have signed Terry, but afford him, they most certainly can’t!

[TheStagMan]

On 18/04/2018 at 04:34, tomav84 said:

i think it's depressing that people that think that someone achieving their pre season target should be sacked. i'm glad you're not my boss...

I'm pretty sure that  the pre season target was automatic promotion.and given our squad it certainly should have been. That has not been achieved barring a miracle. 

I'm glad you are not my employee. I expect excellence from my well paid staff, not whinging and excuses. Scraping by is not acceptable.

Edited April 21, 2018 by TheStagMan

[terrytini]

1 hour ago, TheStagMan said:

I'm pretty sure that  the pre season target was automatic promotion.and given our squad it certainly should have been. That has not been achieved barring a miracle. 

I'm glad you are not my employee. I expect excellence from my well paid staff, not whinging and excuses. Scraping by is not acceptable.

I’m glad you weren’t my boss then......setting a target is one thing....very sensible.....Sacking somebody simply because they don’t reach it - which is clearly what you are inferring - is bonkers.

[srsmithusa]

2 minutes ago, terrytini said:

I’m glad you weren’t my boss then......setting a target is one thing....very sensible.....Sacking somebody simply because they don’t reach it - which is clearly what you are inferring - is bonkers.

This might be your first post that I think is nonsensical.  When exactly would you fire an employee if not when/if they failed to reach the goal?