Credit to Rodgers
- Thread starter localny
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
i think BR deserves the credit for where we are right now and BR should be blamed if at the end of the december we are 5th or 6th in the table. I take it as simple as that.
To speak about luck: I believe in luck, there is no doubt about it. So lets consider luck as a factor and two important parameters affecting the luck as injuries (suspensions) and referee decisions. Sometimes we say that we are unlucky that we had injuries , hence we blew away three points but it is manager's job to forsee that he has adequate cover for the injuries. When the manager is using someone in place of a regular, he has to decide to change in the approach for that particular game so that the team is not getting affected and we still get positive reults.
On the other hand, I dont think the manager can do anything about the referee decision. So, that is all luck I say. I dont wanna talk about 'whether managers influence referee'.
To speak about luck: I believe in luck, there is no doubt about it. So lets consider luck as a factor and two important parameters affecting the luck as injuries (suspensions) and referee decisions. Sometimes we say that we are unlucky that we had injuries , hence we blew away three points but it is manager's job to forsee that he has adequate cover for the injuries. When the manager is using someone in place of a regular, he has to decide to change in the approach for that particular game so that the team is not getting affected and we still get positive reults.
On the other hand, I dont think the manager can do anything about the referee decision. So, that is all luck I say. I dont wanna talk about 'whether managers influence referee'.
Please show me these stats. Would love to take a look.
BTW I'd still love to know how often you've played team sports over the years. School boy level's fine.
I'm pretty sure Ross has played rugby for most of his life.
is man vs food a sport?
Well, then I can't for the life of me understand how the hell he could possibly dismiss the impact of manager in team sports, unless he's just trolling again.
At home or actually with humans?
Are you dyslexic or something ?
Read what I wrote - read what you wrote. Then try to find a connection.
I think the logic here is off Rosco. Rogers preference may be there for possession, but his major preference is for winning. Who's to say he hasn't tempered his game a little to make us less predictable. You are taking a subjective fact (a preference which may change), and created a logical result. That doesn't compute. I think we both know the players aren't ignoring his wishes.
why did they get rid of him then?
Indeed. So why construct arguments around incomplete and hugely simplistic statistical models (which is what you've done throughout this thread, e.g. there are only two managers that have made a difference etc)?
I happen to agree with some of the stuff you're saying but it's reminiscent of Russell Brand talking politics - sounds reasonable till you realize that there it's style (or trolling) over substance.
And as always, these threads could be more interesting if they didn't always polarize debate around the same'ish selective aggregation of 'bleeding edge' research / analysis that really, by your own admission, have yet to be proven correct one way or the other.
We're 6th actually, 0,4% behind Arsenal. The two teams that top those stats are 8th and 7th in the league.
I think you're looking at this in the wrong way tbh. Probably through troll like glasses.
Isnt it a sign of a good manager that his philosophy evolves and changes as the team, players and himself develops?
He got a bit of critisism early last season and at Swansea because the posession stats didnt result in points and goals.
We're still a posession oriented team. To suggest anything else is just strange. But instead of looking like Spurs are currently playing, we've tweaked our approach to get the best out of our current team and players.
Rodgers has said so himself.
Rodgers "process" has us 2nd in the league with over 2 points in average pr game. I hear you crying through huge chunks of Chicken McNuggets about easy fixtures. Well, in the calender year 2013 we're 4th. Have we played shite teams in all of those 30 games?
We're improving and Rodgers deserves huge credit for that.
His approach, tactics, man management skills, the right players, the right backroom staff, winning mentality and set up. Identifying where we need to strenghten and key areas that need work.
Re the managers doesnt matter point:
Utd: Fergie averages 2,34 points pr game last season. Moyes is averaging 1,81 points with the same squad.
Stoke: Pulis 1,1 points per game. Hughes 0,90 pr game. A difference that would have gotten them relegated.
City: Mancini 2,05 pr game. Pellegrini 1,70 with a better squad and a trend that would see them finish 6th.
11 games is to short of a timespan but for your examples there are loads that prove otherwise.
We're conceding the same amount of goals:
No we're not. We're 0,91 this season vs 1,13 last season.Over a season thats 9 goals less which would equal the best defensive record in the league last season.
Progress that will help us reach our goals, and a lot of that is down to Rodgers.
Its fun though..
Is he really trolling though?
I can't imagine why anyone would waste their time reading about research into football analysis only to use that to construct a persona that likes to present flawed arguments in order to supposedly bother people (does it actually bother anyone?).
If it is all a bit of an act, then he's mental Glock-style. If not, he's just a bit dim.
So, which is it?
I think it is pretty clear that, in general, there is a correlation between process and results. However, it is not a straight 1:1 correlation. Resources are a larger variable in management, IMO. What process contributes to is EFFICIENCY in obtaining a given result. Ross managing City would likely trump Benitez managing QPR simply due to resource differential. However, Ross managing City would not trump Mancini or Pellegrini at City because they bring superior process.
The "best" or "most skilled" managers may yield success beyond that which resources predict and bad managers may still yield results better than the field if the differential in resources is great enough. I see examples of this daily in management, where stores "succeed" in spite of terrible management but would have performed far better under a superior manager.
The "best" or "most skilled" managers may yield success beyond that which resources predict and bad managers may still yield results better than the field if the differential in resources is great enough. I see examples of this daily in management, where stores "succeed" in spite of terrible management but would have performed far better under a superior manager.
It's not-quite-sure-of-himself trolling really.
He thinks he's got a point, and he's definitely read it somewhere in some published journal so it must make some semblance of sense, but he's struggling to get it across to us so he dresses it up as half-serious, half-troll in the hope we won't call him out on it. Cos y'know, he's not being serious n all.
Pretty much, but it's a subject he's done to death. If he'd done what a few posters in this thread had done and said "yeah, there's some level of truth in this" then he wouldn't be half far away from the truth, but as per with Ross, you know there's no grey areas in ANYTHING. It's all or nothing, which is the troll in him innit?
No reading between the lines, just his index finger prodding some quote in a book while shouting "LOOK! LOOK! IT IS TRUE!"
Except he's mis-read the book probably because his finger slipped when reading so started with an idea on the first sentence and concluded with the end of another.
That's brilliant.
It's actually Kebabi he plays. The point of the game is to eat a kebab as quickly as possible.
I don't think it's either of those actually. I reckon Ross is being serious but I don't think he's dim. I think he really, really wants the world around him to be reducible to a set of stats and written rules that he can keep tabs on mentally, instead of being the messy, amorphous (and therefore hard to control) reality that it is. The whole thing's reminiscent of Kanwar's insistence that Stevie G is not world class because he doesn't fit Kanwar's artificial personal definition of that term.
I give it a year before Ross starts telling us that players play no part in making a difference to the results.
Managers won't make a difference, players won't make a difference, coaching staff won't make a difference, medical staff won't make a difference. All down to luck because some stats will prove it.
Managers won't make a difference, players won't make a difference, coaching staff won't make a difference, medical staff won't make a difference. All down to luck because some stats will prove it.
T
the_khl
Guest
..or down to how many McNuggets they can consume before Kickoff.
Yup, stats from Bolt's speed at the Olympics prove just that.
Or does it prove that nutritional diet makes absolutely no difference to an athlete's performance?
- Status
Similar threads
