Jump to content

Toughest Championship so far


Curtains

Recommended Posts

Yep because looking at the players that have left or are not available we have

Anderson - started 5 games injured and unavailable most of the time and left in January

Addison - on loan all season and not a available

Maguire - not in the match day squad most of the time on loan for the rest

Green - only available for half a season and used as cover for right back for the majority.

Barker - only played 20 games but will be missed

Shackell - obvious major change

Kilbane - started a few got injured and left in January will hardly be missed

Carroll - a loan we had for 8 weeks hardly can be considered pivotal squad member

Ball - yep played in half the games but was third/fourth choice striker so will not be missed a lot

Overall for the time spent in the match day squad I think only changes that will have any effect are Shackell and Barker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

25%, lets just do starts because its easier, so, all the players who have left, won't play or are leaving with games played (subs) [goals]:

Shackell - 46 (0) [1]

Maguire - 2 (5) [1]

Anderson - 5 (3) [0]

Noble - 1 (1) [0]

Cywka - 3 (5) [1]

Riggott - 0 (0) [0]

Carroll - 8 (4) [1]

Croft - 4 (4) [0]

Ball - 11 (12) [3]

Kilbane - 7 (2) [1]

Green - 25 (1) [1]

Priskin - 4 (1) [1]

Davies - 20 (6) [12]

Bailey - 17 (5) [0]

Barker - 19 (1) [0]

So we have the following totals (percentage in brackets):

Starts: 172 (34%)

Subs: 50 (36%*)

Goals: 22 (44%)

[size=1]*Here subs percentage is calculated against the maximum possible sub appearances. [/size]

From this we can see that the original figure of 25% is actually an underestimate. However, why not only consider it for players who improved the side over the course of the season:

Shackell - 46 (0) [1]

Ball - 11 (12) [3]

Green - 25 (1) [1]

Davies - 20 (6) [12]

Bailey - 17 (5) [0]

Barker - 19 (1) [0]

This gives us:

Starts: 138 (27%)

Subs: 25 (18%*)

Goals: 17 (34%)

[size=1]*Here subs percentage is calculated against the maximum possible sub appearances. [/size]

This is very close to the original 25% with the added kicker of the 34% of the goals. Of course, the club already had to improve on the 50 goals this season, and losing 34% worth of players isn't exactly a great start, but hey... The real test for the club this off season of course is whether we can replace those 6 for the season, in both signings and youngsters stepping up as well as bringing in different types of players, like Jacobs. How I've seen it so far:

Shackell - Keogh

Green - Coutts

Davies - To be signed

Bailey - Hughes?

Barker - *Crickets*

Ball - ..?

Here having Jacobs not being considered a replacement (or improvement) on any previous player.

All the above was for league appearances only.

You have way too much time on your hands.

Also, I'm going to stick my neck out here and say, as long as we get a young back-up left back and a quality striker, our squad has actually improved.

We've brought down the average age of the team (something I like) and added a lot more flair with Jacobs and Coutts, something we severely lacked at times. As for the defence, I'm still going to argue that Keogh is just as good as Shackell and he could certainly be better. Start Keogh and OB from day 1 and I will have no complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep because looking at the players that have left or are not available we have

Anderson - started 5 games injured and unavailable most of the time and left in January

Addison - on loan all season and not a available

Maguire - not in the match day squad most of the time on loan for the rest

Green - only available for half a season and used as cover for right back for the majority.

Barker - only played 20 games but will be missed

Shackell - obvious major change

Kilbane - started a few got injured and left in January will hardly be missed

Carroll - a loan we had for 8 weeks hardly can be considered pivotal squad member

Ball - yep played in half the games but was third/fourth choice striker so will not be missed a lot

Overall for the time spent in the match day squad I think only changes that will have any effect are Shackell and Barker.

Ok I understand now, take out half the players from the squad, don't include a couple more, call it a core squad and it hasn't changed much apart from a few players, oh and any that did play a few games that have left didn't contribute cannot be counted either :-)

Not sure who is going to play the 212 games that these players played in though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

naturally going to improve? we have had young players who peaked when they were young and never did much afterwards. Look at Barnes, Holmes and Addison. Just because they are yong don't assume they will definitely get better and better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's harsh to assume that Derby are relegation candidates so early. We've been slowly improving and as fans its our job to be optimistic about how Derby will do. Not overly optimistic, but anything other than relegation talk as we have gradually established ourselves as a Championship level team. Back to the topic, I guess peoples opinions differ on whether the league is more difficult than last seasons. IMO I think it's just as difficult as previous seasons gone by, the difference is the teams are a little different than usual. Blackburn and Bolton havn't played in the 2nd tier of English football for a while and it seems like a long time since Sheffield Wednesday and Charlton were Championship regulars. Huddersfield deserve to come up after always being the nearly men in league 1 and Wolves coming back down is possibly the most common movement of the lot as they always appear to be to good for the Championship but not quite good enough for the Premier League. For me, as an early guess, Barnsley, Watford and Millwall to struggle. Birmingham, Blackburn and Wolves to do well. Underdogs Pterborough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

looks like Wolves will be getting around 10 million for fletcher, plus parachute payments etc- really makes for an unlevel playing field. So much for FFP

What a joke, more than Podolski or Papiss Cisse.

MOM doing what he does best overspending on average players, he will then quit a few years later when the chairman realises what he has done and stops funding transfers then the club will either be relegated or struggle.

Shows who overpriced British players now, if we were promoted I wouldn't bother just go to Europe where you get techincally better players for less.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fairness has Podolski done well at club level? Fletcher did well to score the goals he did in a poor team. Although 10 million is a good way over his value, he should be valued at a similar rate to Jelavic in my view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luckily Wolves are ****!

I would say that they are more than capable at this level and with another 10 mil and god knows how many millions in parachute payments over the coming seasons it is hard to see them not going up in the near future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say that they are more than capable at this level and with another 10 mil and god knows how many millions in parachute payments over the coming seasons it is hard to see them not going up in the near future

Not sure about them tbh. Average side, very average support, and a board who will not want to squander the chute payments on wages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure about them tbh. Average side, very average support, and a board who will not want to squander the chute payments on wages.

Lets hope so, I have mate who is a wolves fan and has been downright arrogant about them being in the prem and us not. Would be nice to see them struggle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...