Alph Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Don't points indicate more the strength of the division? Say we finished with 66pts this year and finished 6th. Next year we finish 76pts and finish 6th.. (We all know the NPC gets 6 new teams every year and they aren't always of equal quality ie Newcastle/WBA v Wigan/Reading) If the bar is set higher that would suggest the league is poorly balanced. The requirement to make the Play Offs has been higher? Say if Everton and Arsenal started chucking millions about they'd likely become stronger (let's just assume they do). Arsenal and Everton would become much more difficult games for Man United. If Arsenal and Everton (now super rich still) were then relegated for match fixing then wouldn't PTS be a bit easier to pick up? I don't really know. Using my theory if the top 6 have less points than usual then they're much more equal to the rest of the league. I wouldn't fancy them in the PL. If however they set record points I'd say the NPC has become less competitive and teams are becoming dominant. To get 5th with 78pts is better than getting 5th with 70pts. But does coming 6th with 79pts show how strong the league is and that you have reached that high level set to reach the Play Offs. ... Which is Bris's point. I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 By the way, if my post there has found the neutral ground and shown why both can be used to judge a team/league strength then I want a new member title. "Alpha-Peacemaker" I want recognition and stars around my avatar like Huddersfield have stars around their badge. I want to the respect of all forum members and when I wade into an argument I want people to step aside and trust me to get **** done. I want access to everyone's PM's. I want my opinion to become FACT on every topic. I have the final say. That should do it. Your welcome by the way. A. Peacemaker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 By the way, if my post there has found the neutral ground and shown why both can be used to judge a team/league strength then I want a new member title. "Alpha-Peacemaker" I want recognition and stars around my avatar like Huddersfield have stars around their badge. I want to the respect of all forum members and when I wade into an argument I want people to step aside and trust me to get **** done. I want access to everyone's PM's. I want my opinion to become FACT on every topic. I have the final say. That should do it. Your welcome by the way. A. Peacemaker I'll add to this and point out that Mr Vegas' point of view is just another stick to beat our manager with. I can imagine if we finish in the play offs but with a point less than last season he'll deem it a failure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 So Bris... In your 'analysis' have you taken any consideration of the relatively quality of the other teams in the league? This year was the tightest league I've seen in years... Between the playoffs and relegation there was on average less than a point between each team (14 points over 15 teams)... I would look positively and say that the quality of the bottom teams has improved... This means there are less 'easy' games and therefore whilst the teams in the top half will get less, the teams in the bottom half will get more... So points depends entirely on the overall strangth of the league doesn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 THE 'DEFINITIVE MEASURE' is how you equip yourself against your opponents, and as you'll always have 23 opponents at this level, who all have to be opponents to each other, then the only definitive measure is League position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Why is it? Being -3 points away from the playoff average is a strange way of saying we've improved..Because you are playing different teams and line ups with different managers, there are too many variables for point collection. If all 6 teams that have been promoted/relegated to this division this season are worse than the 6 to leave this division, then the league will be easier and therefore you gain more points and you don't have to improve to gain those points. Also you could have a team in financial difficulties and they sell all their players and bring in lesser players then they will have decreased in ability and once again you would pick up more points without improving. With league position, last season we were the 12th best team this season we were 10th best. How is that not improvement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dimmu Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I think this is pretty simple, better league position is always better. Would someone really pick West Ham's 35 points (which was enough to keep them in PL few years back) or Wigan's 36 last season? Quite simple, ain't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Bris is either a sub-standard idiot (are there standards of idiocy like the EF numbers for tornadoes based upon how much mental damage they do to others?) or the best troll I've ever seen. No middle ground with Bris - ever. I concluded a while ago it is the latter. Just about everything is contrary to the popular opinion. A bit like a public school debating society where you are required to take the opposite stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bris Vegas Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Because you are playing different teams and line ups with different managers, there are too many variables for point collection. If all 6 teams that have been promoted/relegated to this division this season are worse than the 6 to leave this division, then the league will be easier and therefore you gain more points and you don't have to improve to gain those points. Also you could have a team in financial difficulties and they sell all their players and bring in lesser players then they will have decreased in ability and once again you would pick up more points without improving. With league position, last season we were the 12th best team this season we were 10th best. How is that not improvement? Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramsbottom Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year. So taking that stance. If we were to finish on the same points yet that points tally sees us finish in the play offs it isn't an indication that we've gotten better but the rest of the league has gotten worse??? Or would it be an indication that the other teams in the division have improved and taken more points off each other while we stood still in our development??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rynny Posted June 19, 2013 Author Share Posted June 19, 2013 Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year.If the standard got worse then what is to say that it won't the following year and the average will then be reduced, will it not? Also running a 1 off race is no comparison with a football table, that is decided by multiple games, which cannot be affected by all 24 teams at the same time. You might have run 10.20 when next to your biggest rival that you pushed that little bit harder than you normally do and the next year you get 10.30 as you are up against random chap you haven't had much dealings with, he is slower than you so you take it easier as you know you are easily beating him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year. You seem to keep comparing running to football... which isn't a fair comparison... Fundamentally when running (sprinting more so than distance) the quality of your opposition makes absolutely no difference to how you run your race... If you are a sub-10 sec runner then running over that is bad, and under that is good... In football you are directly impaired by the quality of your opposition Also, how can you suggest the standard got worse when for the first time in 3 years none of the promoted teams finished higher than 9th and the highest placed relegated team was 7th... AND wolves got relegated... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Im not sure, recently he was bleating on about Arsenal, and how although they have more points, they are not catching up to the top boys. I think he just likes seeing his name in lights, and he has he ever, ever admitted he is wrong ? Probably why he wins thousands, his bookies will pay out on a win even Man Utd finish 2nd this year if they get more points, I mean its an improvement isnt it :wacko: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mostyn6 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year. Have you considered wind factor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I think Bris had more points last year than this year, his posts haven't improved for me. Think he needs to stop being so negative whilst in possession of his opinions, and in the last 5 pages of a thread he needs start to being more positive for me to see an improvement in him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Scarlet Pimpernel Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I think Bris had more points last year than this year, his posts haven't improved for me. Think he needs to stop being so negative whilst in possession of his opinions, in the last 5 pages of a thread he needs start to being more positive for me to see an improvement in him. Yes but you are not taking into account the changing quality of the other posters. I'm on fire currently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Yes but you are not taking into account the changing quality of the other posters. I'm on fire currently. The opposition posters cannot be taken into account when judging an improvement on his points. Say he has 5 good points this week but last year in the same week he had 6 points, you can't say he has improved as a member. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheron85 Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 The opposition posters cannot be taken into account when judging an improvement on his points. Say he has 5 good points this week but last year in the same week he had 6 points, you can't say he has improved as a member. I think if Bris managed 5 good points in a week the world would implode... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Day Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 You have a point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxram Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 Becuase the standard got worse.. If you're a runner and run 100m at one tournament at 10.20 seconds and finished 12th in the field.. Next year you run in the same field and do a time of 10.30 seconds but finsih 10th have you improved? The average runtime of making the top 6 is 10.00 seconds.. No you haven't.. It just means that the others have gotten worse too for one year.. Should the average stay in line then next year 10.00 seconds will be the tearget again.. Yet you're running now at 10.30.. That's a bigger gap than it was the previous year. Football is a 'zero-sum-game' Comparable Games are Rugby, Cricket, ect Athletics are not 'zero-sum-games' they are 'strictly competitive' games and are not comparable as they have different systems of play. Sorry to be the boring mathematician but you have used it twice and its not a true analogy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.