Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Position of clubs compared to transfer spend



Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,093
Surrey
Huddersfield 16th? It's quite hard to believe they are that far up IMO.

Watford the big winners of moneyball by the looks of it - a cup final appearance and excellent league showing.
 

Titanic

Super Moderator
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
38,975
West Sussex
Transfer spend is not the only significant metric... wages spend is equally important.

I suspect that we would also look to be doing OK in a wages comparison?
 


perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,454
Sūþseaxna
Transfer spend is not the only significant metric... wages spend is equally important.

I suspect that we would also look to be doing OK in a wages comparison?

Bournemouth spend less on wages than we do, but comparable.
 


BLOCK F

Well-known member
Feb 26, 2009
6,310
Those stats should be pinned to the head of every Hughton unbeliever.



If we take these statistics at face value one may well come to the conclusion that competing in the Prem is basically a waste of time as it is all predetermined by how much has been spent.
The managers of those clubs who haven't spent much know they are in the shit before the season starts and so do the directors, which begs the question, why bother, unless you are prepared to spend big bucks?
Just asking? And does it mean that managers that perform in line with their club's expenditure have a ready made excuse if they do no better than they are forecast to do according to expenditure?
If so, how depressing and what happened to the ability of managers to get players and teams that may not have been assembled at great cost, to outperform?
Perhaps this is the case in the Prem and it would be interesting to know how this works out in the lower leagues.
I'm not totally convinced by this and am daft enough to believe that a good manager can still have a huge influence over their team's results.
 
Last edited:


perseus

Broad Blue & White stripe
Jul 5, 2003
23,454
Sūþseaxna
Doomed if team's spend, doomed if they don't!
 


Really? Doesn't it just illustrate how the players we have splashed out on have largely failed to make an impact?

Yes.

A little statistics are a dangerous thing
 

Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
19,592
Eastbourne
If we take these statistics at face value one may well come to the conclusion that competing in the Prem is basically a waste of time as it is all predetermined by how much has been spent.
The managers of those clubs who haven't spent much know they are in the shit before the season starts and so do the directors, which begs the question, why bother, unless you are prepared to spend big bucks?
Just asking? And does it mean that managers that perform in line with their club's expenditure have a ready made excuse if they do no better than they are forecast to do according to expenditure?
If so, how depressing and what happened to the ability of managers to get players and teams that may not have been assembled at great cost, to outperform?
Perhaps this is the case in the Prem and it would be interesting to know how this works out in the lower leagues.
I'm not totally convinced by this and am daft enough to believe that a good manager can still have a huge influence over their team's results.


I think it is a direct correlation, just like for instance life expectancy is linked directly to wealth. It is a little clumsy and there are always outliers but money talks these days and the top few have a ridiculous amount, so much that yes, as a fan of a mid-sized club, which is probably what BHA are, it is depressing.

Really? Doesn't it just illustrate how the players we have splashed out on have largely failed to make an impact?

The first table can be used to show that, however, the second shows Hughton is doing better than he 'should'.
 

Green Cross Code Man

Wunt be druv
Mar 30, 2006
19,592
Eastbourne
Aren't they the same table - one in alphabetical order and one in order of spend? Or am I missing something?

Yeah sorry, and I see what [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] is saying i.e. we haven't used high fee players as much as we might have and then that has affected how that table looks. It is a crude measure but interesting.
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
10,584
Assume The 10 are

Ryan
Montoya
Bong
Dunk
Duffy
Stephens
Propper
Knockaert
March
Murray

Can anyone confirm?
 

Postman Pat

Well-known member
Jul 24, 2007
6,971
Coldean
Transfer spend is not the only significant metric... wages spend is equally important.

I suspect that we would also look to be doing OK in a wages comparison?

Capture.PNG

Appreciate we have increased since last season.
 

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills


Top
Link Here