Ghost of Clough

6 minutes ago, Jubbs said:

45% wage bill to turnover apparently. 

I don't believe that for a second.

Isn't that just player wages? That'll take us to £9.5m on just the players - a figure which will be higher than all but 4 other clubs' total wage bill.

We had a total wage bill close to £14m last season (£1.5m of that was Bielik). Our total this season will be close to that.

19 minutes ago, enachops said:

Oh come on. CEO and finance officer of a club going into admin. Of course he has some responsibility. Morris is the ultimate one of course, but Pearce constantly said we weren’t in danger of FFP. He was wrong. 

What's he able to publicly take responsibility for when it's covered by an NDA?

1 minute ago, TheHomunculusLives said:

Based on long-term potential, which players in our academy have the highest ceiling if they fulfil their talent? Based on a scenario whereby their attitude is good and they don't have serious injuries.

On the limited evidence I've seen, I'd say Jack Thompson and Cruz Allen.

DRobinson and DBrown are closest to the first team and should have had more minutes this season to help them transition from youth football to men's.

JThompson is my man of the match most weeks now. He's an excellent shot stopper and calm when playing out from the back.

I really like Cox who is perfectly suited to Warne's LCB role. Versitile enough to play LB or LWB too. Eventually I'd like to see him at LCB with Cashin moved central.

Gill was a regular at LB for the U18s last season despite being an U16 player. He's now being introdcued to U21 football.

Hawkins is another who was fast tracked. 17 U18 games when still an U16 player, then 16 games at U21 when a first year scholar. Earlier in the season I stated he needed to start adding end product to his game, which he has started to do over the past coiple of months. He's a simialr type of player to Bird, is currently a DM but could be moved further forward eventually, just like Warne's done with Bird.

Allen is a special player. He was introduced to the U18s late last season and scored 2 goals in 4 apps. Since the summer he has really kicked on. He's scored 3 goals in 343 mins for Wales U17 and 7 goal contributions in 719 minuts for our U18s. He's recently stepped up to the U21s too (scoring on his only start) He's also an excellent freekick taker. Mainly an AM but can play anywhere in midfield or on the wings. He's still only 16.

5 minutes ago, enachops said:

One of the questions was about his role in the previous regime. He could have spoken about that. Not everything is covered through an NDA. It’s not financial records or meetings he was asked to disclose. He just hid behind the NDA as he does for most things. 

You'll probably find pretty much everything SP did whilst working under Mel is now covered by an NDA

1 minute ago, enachops said:

Yes the NDA’s are in place but there are certain things he can surely talk about

You don't know what's incldued in the NDA, so you can't claim there are things he can talk about but chooses to avoid.

3 hours ago, kevinhectoring said:

A careful listen to Warne’s pre Exeter presser sort of supports this, tho’ whether the move was Warne’s or Max’s decision is not made clear    
Great shame he’s going 

Bird wanted to move on, Warne was happy with it being a sale with loan back

44 minutes ago, Returning ram said:

Derby lost DM, Knight, Dobbin, Robert's, Davies, have two forwards out injured...I could go on. 

Are you suggesting Warne has made us weaker or stronger?

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

Another myth that doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

What will our starting 11 be tonight?

23 minutes ago, David said:

With football though, it’s not like snooker where you can line the balls up and have 2 players take the same shot.

xG fails to take into account the ability of the opposition defenders and keeper.

It fails to take into account weather conditions.

It fails to take into account the current situation in so many way, home, away, comfortable lead, behind, fitness level, carrying knocks.

If it was a game played between robots in an indoor arena I could see the value.

Comparing it to shots as a metric is nonsensical, shots and shots on target are facts. Indisputable facts.

Nothing more than a stat that with possession gives you a rough idea as to how the game as gone.

Never really see anyone give it much value as you see others try and give xG.

Just watch the game. You will know how it’s gone and who played better, who created the better chances to win the game and who’s finishing or mistakes let them down.

You're right - there are many variables and it is 'just a stat'. But, it does take account of these somewhat by giving the average liklihood of a player scoring agaisnt an average defence with an average goalkeeper, etc.. It still comes down to how you use the stat, just like any other stat - be in possession, passing, tackles, whatever tickles your fancy...

Nothing beats watching a game and it's the only realy way you can enjoy the game. But, what if you can't watch all 552 League 1 games to make a fair judgement? How do you compare how you're doing with other teams? You could compare us against them based on how they played against us, but that's when you get some people saying Peterborough are the best L1 side of all time, whilst some of their own fans are worried they won't even finish top 6. In a lot of cases, stats assist with making a more balanced opinion than just what you see with your eyes. We see "XXXX doesn't run enough" all the time. Well if you saw their running stats, you may think differently.

Interpretation is also important. Which is better: 10 shots or 2 shots? Now what if both had a total xG of 1 (10 shots of 0.1 xG vs 2 shots of 0.5 xG)? 
Whilst the xG suggests both teams should have both scored 1, there's actually a 75% probability that the team with just 2 shots has scored, whilst there's only a 65% probability that the team with 10 shots has scored. It's not until that team has had 13 shots worth 0.1 xG (1.3 xG total) where they both have a 75% probability of a goal.
Team 1 only need 5 shots (2.5 xG) to have more than a 95% probability of having scored. Team 2 needs 30 shots (3.0 xG) for the same probability.

3 hours ago, IlsonDerby said:

I’ll be honest - my problem is not Warne and has never been Warne. My problem is performances and that more often than not we still feel along way away from what he thinks his football should look like at full flow yet he’s had 3 transfer windows and a very healthy budget to work with. 
 

I’m pretty sure that our budget is higher than any of the Rotherham sides he took up. 
 

If we were playing the football I think he envisages his teams playing then yeah it’d be a bit of a change from the possession based stuff we were a bit more used to but ultimately it’d still be entertaining to watch but in a different way. 

The highest wage bill Warne had in L1 was £6.5m (inclusive of non-playing staff). The budget at Derby is double that.

12 hours ago, Jourdan said:

Bolton, Barnsley, and Peterborough all finished last season above us and they are all in contention again this season. They are good teams. They are the benchmark for us this season. We knew that if we wanted to get promoted, it’s these teams we would have to outperform.

There is no contradiction. I am saying they are good teams in a competitive league. If the league wasn’t competitive, these teams and indeed ourselves would be dropping points far less frequently.

More waffle? I’ll put be putting Brussels out of business at this rate. I express my opinions plenty, if you disagree with them or can’t comprehend them, that’s fine.

How much of an advantage have we had with Wigan and Reading being in financial difficulties and having points deductions really? Reading and Wigan have beaten us this season. Reading have pipped us to transfer targets. Surely it’s the likes of Portsmouth, Oxford, Blackpool and Stevenage who have profited from this?

Bolton - Their 2 best players from last season were only on loan and have failed to replace them with equally as good players.

Barnsley - Lost their manager who was a significant step up from the previous 4 managers they had, so were isntantly weaker. They also sold their keeper and 2 best CBs, all have been replaced with worse players.

Peterborough - Reduced their squad size so much that a RB being recalled and a winger being injured is massively derailing their season. Tried to sell their top scorer, failed, then dropped him to a backup option. Sold/released 3 of their top 5 scorers from last season, one of which was also their joint 2nd top assister with another of those being sold being their 5th top assister. They had a massive rebuild job to do over the summer

22 minutes ago, MadAmster said:

As an old school type, I obviously go for hype. Is it a more valuable stat than shots, shots on target? I don't think it is.

Here's some examples from last weekend

Luton 1.75 Sheff U 1.56. The result was 1-3
Villa 2.45 Utd 1.9. The result was 1-2
Red Dogs 1.25 Toon 0.68. The result was 2-3
Fulham 1.75 B'mouth 2.61. The result was 3-1

Shots/shots on were

Luton 20/5 Sheff U 7/3.
Villa 23/10 Utd 17/5.
Red Dogs 13/3 Toon 7/5.
Fulham 7/6 B'mouth 25/4.

Look at xG and, in all 4 cases the team with the better xG lost. Look at shots and the team with the most shots lost. Shots on target sees Luton and Villa losing despite more SOT and then Toon and Fulham having more SOT and winning.

IMO xG is no better a stat than shots/SOT. In the end, it all comes down to creating chances, making the decision to shoot and then whether it's off target, on target but saved/blocked or on target and in.

In the interest of balance, there were other games where the side with the best xG won.

xG is a useful tool if used correctly. Give Chris Martin and Connor Sammon exactly the same chance and they'll have the same xG, but one of them will be more liekly to score as he's a better finisher. Unsurprisingly, the teams who create a high proportion of chances for their best finishers also outperform their xG as a team, whilst the team creating chances for poorer finishers underperform.

xG is a better metric than shots as it gives meaning to the shot - the chance of scoring from 1 yard out will be significantly greater than 40 yards out.

Results have obviously dropped off a bit since we played Oxford. However, every team will have a bad spell, just like they'll have an exceptional spell. Since our poor start, we've been a top 2 side. As our squad continues to return from a range of injuries, I have no doubt that our form will improve again. 

7 hours ago, sage said:

The trouble with playing Foden, or indeed Maddison, with Bellingham and Rice means Bellingham will end up playing deeper when he is on a rich vein of goalscoring form. Our defence and keeper isn't great and any injury to Rice, Stones or Kane would be a disaster. 

I'm not suggesting Henderson or Phillips but the 3rd midfielder is a massive conundrum.   

Gallagher or Ward-Prowse?

1 hour ago, Ram-Alf said:

Finances at a guess, Better players, Keeping hold of the 22k plus ST holders, If promoted we'll get circa £8 million in TV revenue, We'll need at least 12+ more players at a higher wage cost, Transfer fees + agents fees, The ticket prices will rise as the product in theory will rise, I believe we are losing a considerable amount of loot in League 1, I think Clowes will need some form of financial backing...ie some rich "sugar daddy" to come on board😬

Coming out of embargo and the game starts again with a clean slate, May be Stephen Pierce is already scouting for the next multi millionaire who has millions to flush down the toilet 😉

Preston haven't finished lower than 14th since they were promoted in 2015 (best finish was 7th). Their wagw bill last season was £21m (down from a peak of £24m). That's where we would be if we put all our extra revenue towards wages. Losses would also remain the same (excluding player sales), which I assume is a level Clowes is 'content' to maintain.

4 minutes ago, Andicis said:

The reason Bolton, Barnsley and Peterborough aren't running away with it, because they are also poor. Hence why people like myself call the league poor. 

Do you genuinely believe that the league is as good this year? 

Stevenage were playing in L2 last season and are now 6th, equal to their highest ever finsoh in English football! Leyton Orient also promoted and are 9th. 

If a side can go from L2 to 6th, it shouldn't take much for a side to improve on a 7th place finish last season.

39 minutes ago, Simmo’s left foot said:

I would ask how competitive is a club living within its cashflow means can be, and is it possible to be both sustainable and top 6 competitive both in league one and the championship. Also his thoughts on player pay levels etc.

Without making player sales, we would have to pretty much half our wage bill or make sacrifices elsewhere - academy, maintenance, etc.

Going sustainable in L1 without player sales would still give us a top half playing budget (just), but it would likely still be about £2m short of top 6.

Burton won promotion in 15/16 on a £3.6m wage bill (total club). Rotherham had wage bills ranging from £5.8m to £6.5m in Warne's promotion seasons.

79 mins - Oduroh and Hawkins on for Bardell and Fornah

1-0 FT and we move 3 places up the table

53 mins - Fornah yellow
60 mins - West Brom make the first change of the game (CM for CM)

HT. 1-0 up. DRobinson and Bardell both picked up yellow not long after the goal.

34 mins - 1-0 KRobinson (assisted by Gibson-Hammond)

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

 

JThompson

Bardell   Bartley   KRobinson   Gill

Gibson-Hammond   DRobinson   Fornah   Moloney

Weston   Wheeldon

Subs:  Shattell, Bradley Johnson, Oduroh, Hawkins, Fapetu

41 minutes ago, Wolfie20 said:

So what? It seems some fans are reluctant to accept, primarily after going into administration and attempting to deal with the aftermath of that, WE ARE a League one club like it or not. We have to earn promotion with the resources available and within the restrictions we have to work under and do what we can to succeed.

In our current position, I'm not in the least concerned about how we would fare in the Championshop should we get there next season - let's worry about that when the time comes. 

Poor us. It's a miracle we're this far awaay from relegation with our pathetic c£14m wage bill. Warne should be manager of the year based on where we are in the league and the budget available to him.

To help copare our amazing useof funds, Bolton and Charlton were only just above the £10m mark in their last set of accounts. No other current L1 was above that figure.

35 minutes ago, MadAmster said:

Rowett. Guaranteed to polarise thoughts. I didn't like the football he served up, despite it being reasonably successful. Much the same as I was with Paul Clement. Clement went when results became as bad as the football. Rowett never got that far. None of us will really know why he went but... the commonest "reason/rumour" is MM told him there was no money for incoming transfers which was why he decided he'd be better off elsewhere. In came Lampard... Waggy £5M, Marriott undisclosed, Florian Jozefzoon £2.75M, Wilson undisclosed loan fee, Holmes for a reported £700K, Cole no fee but wages won't have been cheap, Tomori  undisclosed loan fee, Andy King undisclosed loan fee, Evans for a reported £1M, Malone undisclosed fee, Mount undisclosed loan fee. So, there was money there, possibly just not for Rowett. One thing is certain, there;s little chance we'd have had Wilson, Tomori or Mount if GR had still been manager. I think we would have still seen "safety first" football but we'll never know if he could have improved on his 17/18 finish.

Rowett's style of play still varied. A bit of magic from Lawrence or Vydra. Nugent and Winnall pressing from the front, and Jerome to give us a target man for Forsyth to aim his crosses at. Weimann and Russell (until Jan) mixed it up on the wings.

Warne gives us "pass to Hourihane who will pass it out to the right to get Mendez-Laing on the ball. Mendez-Laing will cross to Collins". It's all too predictable which contributes to it being boring to watch.

13 minutes ago, Old Spalding Ram said:

Started against Cheltenham, subbed after an hour.  Those stalwarts of the player ratings thread gave him a score ranging from 3 to 6 with a mode average of 4.

Signed on the 22nd of January, now in his fourth week at the club.

We spend time chasing and signing an out and out winger with a good reputation at this level throughout this league when playing in a front three, once signed we move to playing two up front.

……………no wonder the kid looks cheesed off.

 

I think it comes down to a lack of clear plan on how signigns will fit into the side. We had the same in the summer byt signing 2 RWBs and a LB to play as wing backs. The LB struggles at LWB then the RWBs pick up injuries. We sign a RB, shift to 4 at the back and the LB looked settled when he eventually had a couple of starts. The RWBs no longer simply slot in the side as both lack defensive qualities Warne wants to see at RB, or are either not quick enough or lack end product to play at RW.

Our CF targets varied in style. Mark Harris, Rhodes, etc.. 

No we've gone to 352 without a recognised LWB and only 1 forward, despite starting a winger at CF, having 2 wingers on the bench and another who has regularly played there this season.