"Happy with what we've got…"

[blader]

You really should learn to read blader, there are 46 games in a season, what I said was we only needed to win 30 games one nil to gain automatic promotion, no where does it say we will not concede another goal, surely a literate guy such as yourself is also somewhat numerate as proven by your "absolute minimum 65 goals needed"
Which means the other 16 games we could get hammered 10-0 and STILL gain auto promotion where as, as I pointed out scoring 90+ goals in no guarantee of promotion or play off triumph so explain how my reply is ridiculous and yours is anything but utter inane drivel.
Seems I do have some quarter with football old boy, how about you?
For you to say its not possible, inconceivable etc, have a good old think about it and then come back, I'm magnanimous enough to accept your retraction of my lack of football knowledge

That still implies we will not concede in 30of our remaining games. History actually counts for a hell of a lot in football. I can guarantee no professional side has ever been automatically promoted from a 24 team league by scoring 40 goals. Someone found the figures, I think the lowest scorers he could find in the 3rd tier was 58 to win auto promotion.

The lowest scorers in league 1 last year were relegated Sheewsbury (44). So yes, I am saying we need AT LEAST 65 goals to get promoted. Even so called 'clappers' are quoted as recognising we need another striker to achieve automatic promotion. so mathematically, yes, we could get promoted by scoring probably 35 goals, but let's not be naive and say that's a genuine possibility.

 

[Pinchy]

Utterly ridiculous response. If you think we can go up after a season of scoring 30 goals, you don't know anything about football.

We just not going to concede another goal then? What happens when the opposition score first? By my maths we'd have to score 2. The MARGIN of victory only has to be 1, but to say we only need to score 1 per game is utter nonsense.

Ah, the old "you know nothing about football" line. A sure sign of a poor argument.

Those Bristol and Preston fans know their stuff, though. We can't compete with them.

 

[blader]

Ah, the old "you know nothing about football" line. A sure sign of a poor argument.

Those Bristol and Preston fans know their stuff, though. We can't compete with them.

Oh another unfunny, useless, irrelevant post. Unlike you Pinchy. About as entertaining as a castration.

 

[bristolboy]

Ah, the old "you know nothing about football" line. A sure sign of a poor argument.

Those Bristol and Preston fans know their stuff, though. We can't compete with them.

We know nothing down here, mate. You can compete with us, easy. We all thought Cotterill was/ is a wurzel idiot. What do we know? Long way to go mind....

Cider!

 

[DazBlade88]

Also am I the only one that thinks McNulty did well when he came on?

No, I think he looks lively. He forced Logan into a half decent save with a difficult flick and was sniffing out any rebound for the other two saves Logan made after he came on. I always like to see that in a striker and I think he'll chip in with a few goals once he gets more game time.

 

[bristolboy]

Oh another unfunny, useless, irrelevant post. Unlike you Pinchy. About as entertaining as a castration.

You won today, didn't you?! Stop fighting wid yerselves and be happy! Happy days!

This league isn't all that good, not from seeing the first handful of games. It's there for the taking

 

[Cyprus Blade]

I agree that results are what matters but it does seem to me that clean sheets are even more vital if you struggle in front of goal as we do seem to be doing. We cannot just rely on the defence.

I have set out below the number of goals scored by Div 1 promoted sides in last 10 years. The lowest number of goals scored by a team promoted is Colchester at 58. other than that every team is 60+ so I can well understand people being concerned about our strike rate.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I think the best way to negotiate a good loan deal is to say we're desperate for a forward to the press.
Puts the owning club on the front foot, and kills the confidence in this current squad forwards.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

Fair point, but we've played 6 games. We might win our next five games by 2-0 or 3-0 mightn't we? It's incredibly early to judge.

I will keep taking 1-0s while the side are still gelling. How many started today that were the mainstay of our turnaround in form last season? Baxter, Murphy, Doyle, Howard, Collins... I'm struggling now. Isn't that over half the team?

Don't forget too that in those three games we've played Bristol City (top), Posh (2nd), PNE widely tipped to go up... oh, and we put a Premier League side out of the cup. I don't see the need for the doom and gloom just yet.

No.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

When talking about strikers, NC remarks "am happy with what we have got…". But what you have got NC won't get you promotion. Highest win so far is 2-1. Not surprising the top 3 - Bristol Titty, Peterborough, MK Dons average far more than our 1 goal per game average. They have goal scorers throughout. How can he be happy, thought be made an unsuccessful bid for a striker? There is simply not enough goal scorers in the current team to win promotion. Really difficult to see Higdon, McNulty and of course the mighty Porter getting into double figures - between them!

Smell the coffee Nigel….

Agree, thought we played well today against a useful Rochdale side but Nigels comments after the game were baffling. Like you say, he recently missed out on signing a striker or two in the last transfer window so how can he be happy with what we've got, which are basically strikers who can't score goals. From Nigels comments, was it any more obvious that we are awaiting one man to rejoin us.

Away from that was pleased with Wallace's performance when he came on, young Harrison improving, JCR proving a handful. Negatives, a lot knocking Basham who is admittedly average, but our worst performer today was Murphy, lightweight and just not cutting it so far this season.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

He's hardly going to say that what he has is not good enough, is he? Of course he'll want another striker deep down, but since he didn't get one, he has to make out like he's happy. Do you understand the concept of people management? Imagine your boss issued a press release saying that his staff weren't good enough and that he wanted replacements. How would you feel? Motivated? Happy? Dear me.

But he's already intimated that what he has got aren't getting us the goals, as he mentioned missing out on targets during the recent transfer window. This wasn't a deep down feeling but one he made public, just seems bizarre to come on the radio a week or two after and make out that he is happy with what he's got, when clearly he isn't.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

I'm not the first to say it by any means, but Charlton won this division by doing exactly what we did today. They weren't often great to watch but they ground out countless single goal victories, often from 1-0 wins, often courtesy of penalties and free-kicks. Who cares? Three points is three points.

Your right and of course we should be happy when we are winning, and also that fact that we have got some decent results since the Coventry game but what's wrong with people wanting to see us win by scoring a few more goals ?, it's one of the primary reasons we go to watch games isn't it ?.

 

[Rollerball]

That still implies we will not concede in 30of our remaining games. History actually counts for a hell of a lot in football. I can guarantee no professional side has ever been automatically promoted from a 24 team league by scoring 40 goals. Someone found the figures, I think the lowest scorers he could find in the 3rd tier was 58 to win auto promotion.

The lowest scorers in league 1 last year were relegated Sheewsbury (44). So yes, I am saying we need AT LEAST 65 goals to get promoted. Even so called 'clappers' are quoted as recognising we need another striker to achieve automatic promotion. so mathematically, yes, we could get promoted by scoring probably 35 goals, but let's not be naive and say that's a genuine possibility.

Sorry blader I think you misunderstood me, I'm no clapper nor a knocker, I say how I see, yes I do think we need a striker, we need to be killing off games when we are on top BUT the important part is to keep winning and if that means by 1 goal then ill take it as most fans of any team would, I could be wrong but no team has won any English league after winning every game by 3 or 4 goals, sometimes, even the best teams have to rely on scrappy, ugly 1-0 games, and if that's what it takes to get out of league 1, surely every blade, yourself included would take it?
We may not have 1 30 goal striker, but maybe we have 10 5 goal players and just maybe that's how clough is looking at it.
Or even 5, 10 goal players.
Either way your logic is flawed mate, if we win more games than the other teams, even if its only 1-0 and the other teams win one less game but score a hundred goals, WE are still the ones promoted, my point still being valid it's not how many goals you score, it's how many points those goals win, and be it 1-0 or 5-0 it's still only 3 points.
The season Newcastle and man ure (I'd love, just love it if we beat them) Newcastle were scoring buckets of goals, man ure not so many, remind me again who won the league?
Was it the highest scoring team or the one with the most points?
In closing blader for you to say I'm naive and know nothing about football when clearly the person believing scoring more goals not more points wins leagues/promotions is naive and has lesser knowledge of football and its nuances

 

[Revolution]

I'm not the first to say it by any means, but Charlton won this division by doing exactly what we did today. They weren't often great to watch but they ground out countless single goal victories, often from 1-0 wins, often courtesy of penalties and free-kicks. Who cares? Three points is three points.

That is a myth. They scored 76 goals. We are on target for 46.

 

[moDtheGod]

That is a myth. They scored 76 goals. We are on target for 46.

What is a myth? It's not a myth that they won the league or that they ground out a lot of narrow victories. 13 of their 30 league wins were wither 2-1 or 1-0 and they had a couple of 3-2s, so half their wins were by a single goal. Also, for the record, they scored 82 not 76.

But I've already addressed this earlier in the thread. 6 matches in is far too small a sample - you cannot say that we are "on target" for 46, that's daft. If we had scored 3 in each of our first 6 games, would you honestly believe that we were going to score 138 in the season? There is no reason why we couldn't win by 2 or 3 goals on many occasions this season, we have still to play some real rubbish - we are SIX GAMES in. Colchester up next haven't started the season very well, it wouldn't be unrealistic to think we could win that by a couple of goals, then the goal average starts to creep upwards.

Doncaster won the league with 62 goals (and just 26 of those were at home). That's 1.35 per game overall, hardly prolific. They even lost 12 matches.

 

[moDtheGod]

We have only failed to score in one league match this season, a record the same as Posh, Brizzle C and MK Dons, all sides tipped for the top. Preston, another side tipped to do well, have scored in every league game so far this term and are below us.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Oh no, as I said, I wouldn't deny you can go up on 1-0s. My point is mainly to crush the common opinion that Charlton went up on the back of winning 1-0 every week when in fact they scored quite a lot of goals so aren't a great example.

However, history says the absolute minimum goals you need for automatic promotion is 65, and we seem a long way off that currently.

We've already been over this. I'm glad to see you've dispensed with your previous absolute minimum of 70 goals, but there's still some way to go before your description of history reaches accuracy: http://www.s24su.com/forum/index.ph...re-season-favourites.35269/page-5#post-626277

 

[Revolution]

What is a myth? It's not a myth that they won the league or that they ground out a lot of narrow victories. 13 of their 30 league wins were wither 2-1 or 1-0 and they had a couple of 3-2s, so half their wins were by a single goal. Also, for the record, they scored 82 not 76.

But I've already addressed this earlier in the thread. 6 matches in is far too small a sample - you cannot say that we are "on target" for 46, that's daft. If we had scored 3 in each of our first 6 games, would you honestly believe that we were going to score 138 in the season? There is no reason why we couldn't win by 2 or 3 goals on many occasions this season, we have still to play some real rubbish - we are SIX GAMES in. Colchester up next haven't started the season very well, it wouldn't be unrealistic to think we could win that by a couple of goals, then the goal average starts to creep upwards.

Doncaster won the league with 62 goals (and just 26 of those were at home). That's 1.35 per game overall, hardly prolific. They even lost 12 matches.

People talk like Charlton got promoted by winning every game 1-0. It's a myth. They had 8 1-0s, which is a lot. But they scored freely for most of the season, home and away.

As for 3-2 wins, what is it, 22 months since we scored 3 away?

Doncaster is an outlier. No other team has scored so few in the last 10 years and gone up.

6 games is small sample size. Of course. But it's all we have. Last season, however, was 46 games. Many of the same players were the 4th lowest scorers in the league.

This team does not look like it has enough goals in it for a top 2 place. If it maintains this rate of scoring, we won't go up. I know people don't want to see this for themselves, but it's staring them in the face.

 

[blader]

Sorry blader I think you misunderstood me, I'm no clapper nor a knocker, I say how I see, yes I do think we need a striker, we need to be killing off games when we are on top BUT the important part is to keep winning and if that means by 1 goal then ill take it as most fans of any team would, I could be wrong but no team has won any English league after winning every game by 3 or 4 goals, sometimes, even the best teams have to rely on scrappy, ugly 1-0 games, and if that's what it takes to get out of league 1, surely every blade, yourself included would take it?
We may not have 1 30 goal striker, but maybe we have 10 5 goal players and just maybe that's how clough is looking at it.
Or even 5, 10 goal players.
Either way your logic is flawed mate, if we win more games than the other teams, even if its only 1-0 and the other teams win one less game but score a hundred goals, WE are still the ones promoted, my point still being valid it's not how many goals you score, it's how many points those goals win, and be it 1-0 or 5-0 it's still only 3 points.
The season Newcastle and man ure (I'd love, just love it if we beat them) Newcastle were scoring buckets of goals, man ure not so many, remind me again who won the league?
Was it the highest scoring team or the one with the most points?
In closing blader for you to say I'm naive and know nothing about football when clearly the person believing scoring more goals not more points wins leagues/promotions is naive and has lesser knowledge of football and its nuances

I understand that you're saying if we win more games than others we win promotion, yes. Which is absolutely correct, can't take anything away from that point.

However you must also accept that it is pretty clear we will need 65 goals to win automatic promotion (MK Dons hve 14 already!) which we don't look capable of. We scored 48 (was it?) last season, and yesterday's starting 11 had only JCR as a new addition in a forward role. So unless we think he can score 20 more goals than Flynn did last season, it's difficult to see how we can be considered contenders.

What I would say is, top 6 is a more than achievable position for us. I think almost by default, as it's difficult to find 6 teams better than us (however poor we've been). But top 2? No I'm afraid we just don't score enough goals, it's as simple as that for me. However, the right loan (and he has to be right) could propel us up to automatics, but they'd have to hit the ground running.

 

[Revolution]

We've already been over this. I'm glad to see you've dispensed with your previous absolute minimum of 70 goals, but there's still some way to go before your description of history reaches accuracy: http://www.s24su.com/forum/index.ph...re-season-favourites.35269/page-5#post-626277

I've read your post before. Again,outliers and cherry picking, and goes back too far. The last 10 year average for 2nd place teams is 76 goals. Last 5 years, even higher. Teams are scoring more often.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

I do agree that it is all about points at the end of the day, but the thing is that if we don't score freely ( and there is an argument which says we should be scoring for fun at this level ) then it puts even more pressure on the defence to repeatedly come up with clean sheets or as near as dammit. And one of our collective concerns has been "is our defence as good/better or worse than last year" with the departure of Brayford and Maguire.

Please don't get me wrong - I do think we have played some of the better sides in the Division so far ( 2 of them away), it is early in the season and I am more concerned than panicking about our strike rate but I had a look at goal difference for the promoted sides in the last 10 years ( couldn't sleep and needed something to do). I know there are lies, damned lies and statistics but unless it is a truly exceptional season (like 2005-06 or 2012-13) it looks to me like we will struggle for promotion unless we up our goals per game.

Our goal difference over the last three seasons is 41+, 14+ and falling to 2+ last season.

Apart from Doncaster's 18+ in 2012/13 no side has won the division in the last 10 years with a goal difference less than 29+ and 7 out of the last 10 champions had a goal difference of 40+ or more. The average G/D for the champions is 40+ over the last 10 years.

Of the runners-up Colchester had 12 victories by the odd goal and a goal difference of 18+ (2005-06). All of the others had a G/D of 23+ or more - 4 with 30+ or more. The average G/D for the runners-up is 29.1+ over the last 10 years.

Of the play-off promoted sides the lowest G/D is Yeovil with 15+ (2012-13) - 13 victories coming by the odd goal. Followed by the pigs (2004-05) and Barnsley (2005-06) both with 18+. Five of the 10 promoted sides had a G/D of 25+ or more. The average G/D for the play-off promoted side is 24.4+ over the last 10 years.

 

[MBoreman]

We could go as high as third by winning our game in hand, more likely top 6, having played some of the better sides in the league yet people are panicking? It's more than likely at some point the side will have gelled enough and hit the form of last season. Until then when we're not quite at our best it's important to pick up points which was exactly what happened yesterday.

 

[true99blade]

The fact that people are still moaning after being 5 games unbeaten against teams that were tipped to do well this year is just embarrassing in my humble opinion. Peterborough have only lost one game so far this season and it was to us. Preston,at the time, were unbeaten and looked a very strong team when we played them and we did exceptionally well against them. Both teams will be in the top 6 along with us. We've had the toughest start out of the lot who are favourites and we've managed to bring in more points than I thought we would. In reality it is far too early to judge the team. Evidence of that is just look at last seasons table at this time. Anybody who can criticise Clough and the way he's going about things ought to actually go to a game. Rochdale were no pushovers and it's understandable that the team still needs to find its feet. This compulsive need for a 30 goal a season striker is odd. If you actually went to the game yesterday then it would be clear that if we had someone such as Ched's ilk in his last season for us, it wouldn't have made any difference to the score. We weren't great and there wasn't a bag full of chances.

 

[alcoblade]

History? What utter bollox a team can conceivably go up scoring 30 or even less if those are all 1-0 wins and that's for a 90 point season, less than half of your "absolute minimum" needed.
Look how many we scored the season Wendy pipped us, we have proven its wins and points that ultimately count not the amount you score, we were 5/6 highest goal scorers in Europe not just England and what did scoring loads of goals get us?
Another disappointing trip to the play offs.
So thanks for the history lesson blader but ill take 30+ 1-0 scraped wins to get out of this league than score "absolute minimum of 65" and still end up in this god forsaken shit hole of a league.

Sorry fella , but you can't write off what he's saying so easily. History does teach you quite a bit, and no club in history has gone up by winning1 0 every week.

There's no need for this bullshit clapper versus slasher vitriol. But the only thing that clearly isn't bollocks is that we need to, and might yet, score more goals.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

But if your hunch is wrong (and I believe it is) any such statement would be bizarre, wouldn't it?

To be fair Pinch, you're on record as saying that big signings were on the way before the off. You must be a little surprised/ disappointed ?

Whatever the reality is, a strategy of holding all your investment until a later date seem like a really silly one. You could spend it now and but players who will be an asset both now and then. Right now, we are a long way off getting to the position to test the theory.

I no longer believe it, but I hope I am wrong.

UTB

 

[Rollerball]

Sorry fella , but you can't write off what he's saying so easily. History does teach you quite a bit, and no club in history has gone up by winning1 0 every week.

There's no need for this bullshit clapper versus slasher vitriol. But the only thing that clearly isn't bollocks is that we need to, and might yet, score more goals.

UTB

No club in history huh, until arsenal no club in history had gone unbeaten in a season and everyone said that couldn't be done, so yes alco history is bollox, it is being re written every week and just because something hasn't happened yet does not mean it won't
Saying that I reiterate, I didn't say we would go up winning 1-0 every game I said WE COULD win 30 games 1-0 and that would all but guarantee promotion, I was trying to illustrate you don't need to score 65+ goals to gain promotion, it COULD be done scoring 30 possibly less not that it will.

 

[alcoblade]

No club in history huh, until arsenal no club in history had gone unbeaten in a season and everyone said that couldn't be done, so yes alco history is bollox, it is being re written every week and just because something hasn't happened yet does not mean it won't
Saying that I reiterate, I didn't say we would go up winning 1-0 every game I said WE COULD win 30 games 1-0 and that would all but guarantee promotion, I was trying to illustrate you don't need to score 65+ goals to gain promotion, it COULD be done scoring 30 possibly less not that it will.

History gets re written and is not gospel, but it does tell you a lot. But you are free to consider whatever you want as bollocks, it becomes a bit of a sideshow. The gist of the issue is that any club that scores as few as we currently do will not get promoted. That's pretty much a statement of fact , simply backed up by history.

UTB

 

[LoughboroBlade]

I've read your post before. Again,outliers and cherry picking, and goes back too far. The last 10 year average for 2nd place teams is 76 goals. Last 5 years, even higher. Teams are scoring more often.

To say history gives us a total you absolutely need to get promotion isn't quite right though and is no guarantee in itself, as we fantastically displayed in our first League 1 season. Does it increase your chances? Certainly. Could we get promoted with only 60 goals scored? Quite unlikely. But then it was quite unlikely we'd get relegated from the Premier League with 38 points.

The key to being able to get promoted with a lower than average goalscoring is a tight defence - something Clough has prioritised throughout his time here. In the last 5 years, teams promoted automatically conceded an average of 42.4 goals. When you consider that we conceded 51 the season we finished 3rd it's clear with that total we were always going to struggle.

We've got a solid basis for achieving a low goals conceded total this season. It goes without saying that we'll have to score a few this season too, and I don't disagree that success on the whole has been less frequent with lower goalscoring teams. But I would suggest we're in a decent position to be the next outlier.

 

[Pinchy]

To be fair Pinch, you're on record as saying that big signings were on the way before the off. You must be a little surprised/ disappointed ?

Whatever the reality is, a strategy of holding all your investment until a later date seem like a really silly one. You could spend it now and but players who will be an asset both now and then. Right now, we are a long way off getting to the position to test the theory.

I no longer believe it, but I hope I am wrong.

UTB

Yes, mate. I was expecting some rather more eye-catching recruits. I was surprised we didn't (apparently, who really knows?) make more effort to get Conor Coady. That said it looks as though a fit Wallace (again an imponderable) might be just as good. I don't know if Coady's tearing up trees at Hudders but news has yet to reach me if he is.

I suspect there are a number of factors in play:

1. I think NC has certain standards. He will not knowingly bring in players who are no better than what we've got. Lots of managers say that, but do they act accordingly? I say "knowingly" of course, because I have seen Basham play!

2. It really isn't as simple as having money. In League One, surely you are bound to struggle to recruit players who have suitors in a higher league, examples being perhaps Coady and O'Grady, amongst others yet unknown?So, the notion of 'big signings' has to be seen in a League One context. We need to be wary, also of "this years model". People have salivated over the likes of Paddy Madden, Stuart Beavon, Craig Davies, Sam Winnall, Steve May and many others. The verdict of history, as opposed to a snapshot in time, may very likely not be kind to these players.

3. So far as I am (confidently) aware, HRH is contractually obliged to invest in a structured, progressive manner with a view (written into the contract) to elevating the club into the Premiership. There is a budget for this year with capacity remaining for additions, be it loans or purchases in January. I appreciate why you and others take a cynical view. We have had some real charlatans in charge of our club over the years. I don't include Kevin McCabe in that category but that's a different issue. This time, I'm sure it's different. If you look at it objectively, HRH wants a profit. He won't get one unless and until we reach the top level. To achieve that he will have to invest, and, when necessary and practicable, invest big. If they do not intend to invest, then the Prince and his team (including a very active Jim Phipps) are wasting a great deal of time and effort on a conspicuous sham that is bound to be exposed publicly sooner rather than later - to what possible point or purpose?

4. After a few Dostoyevskian paragraphs here's one short and succint: Ched!

 

[MiserableBlader]

When talking about strikers, NC remarks "am happy with what we have got…". But what you have got NC won't get you promotion. Highest win so far is 2-1. Not surprising the top 3 - Bristol Titty, Peterborough, MK Dons average far more than our 1 goal per game average. They have goal scorers throughout. How can he be happy, thought be made an unsuccessful bid for a striker? There is simply not enough goal scorers in the current team to win promotion. Really difficult to see Higdon, McNulty and of course the mighty Porter getting into double figures - between them!

Smell the coffee Nigel….

3 pages of arguments about 'facts' so far.

1. Anybody considered the option that Clough is not as desperate for promotion as we are?
That he's quite happy to 'progress' in the same division and (he is sure) keep his job, in an easy environment.
A massive club in a piss pot league.
That he does not want to be in the position of Russell Slade - spending money and then being sacked after 7 league games because he's not pissing the league.

2. The assumption is that Ched must be coming - that he 'could not be that stupid'.
Well - he was last year!
How many strikers did he sign on the run in for last season - after letting the only decent one Miller leave?

3. Remind me. How many promotions has Clough achieved at League level?