But your comments are wasted words. You don’t know how they’re evaluating it. Are they focusing on PPDA, average length of pass, pivoting speed, passes into penalty box, transfer cost, replacement cost, injury likelihood etc etc. I don’t know what Rice and co value either. I don’t know what they’ve observed for Morley. It’s such a waste of time talking about it because it’s all conjecture based on zero knowledge of how the data is evaluated and how the decisions are executed.
Going back to this btw, it's one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever seen on the Gasroom.
First of all, our season isn't "in the bin" after one draw, with 19 games remaining.
Second, we've taken four points from two games since Blooms left. It's not exactly two 3-0 defeats.
Third, it completely ignores that we struggled to beat teams coming to AP and sitting in for a 0-0 for the last two months under Blooms. How was yesterday any different to Mansfield, Bolton, Exeter, Blackpool, Huddersfield? Since Mansfield outplayed us in November and were very unfortunate to lose to Leahy's fluke, every single opposition team to come to AP has sat deep, defended solidly, and shown almost no attacking ambition whatsoever. We've struggled in every such game. Yesterday was just a continuation of that
I summed up earlier today my feelings and thoughts about how the current regrettable scenario might develop and have no wish to participate in any continuation of such a sadly divisive debate.
On the contrary, I think Matt Bloomfield wanted Morley, but the powers that be didn’t - presumably because he didn’t fit the data model that us mere mortals aren’t allowed to discuss as we aren’t intelligent enough to understand it.
It feels very much to me that by making an offer to extend the loan they were offering Matt a carrot to keep him happy - albeit a manky Asda wonky carrot (short term loan deal) rather than a Waitrose organic one (signing Morley on a long term deal).
Similar with the Bradley loan deal, some are offering this as proof that Matt had some input into recruitment but my feeling is that was just a low cost option to keep him happy, plus solve an immediate short term crisis at the back.
It seems to me that the real transfer dealings (the four most recent additions) have been done without any input from the football management side - basically, we’re signing these players, you’ve got to work with them and integrate them into your team - and that to my mind is a big part of why Matt walked away. He’s worked wonders to get his team to the top of the league and could see the hard work potentially being trashed by having to integrate players that he doesn’t know will fit his style of play or could disrupt the harmony in the squad.
If I dare post something that isn't about MB... This X account posts updates weekly on every team's PPG and how this tracks with the expected PPG required to achieve promotion, play offs etc. Our update for this week clearly shows the recent stumbles, but we are (just) tracking ahead of the promotion line for now. We do need to improve the points return though if we are going to make 2nd though imo.
I had a look at our xG and xGA averages yesterday and the gap has been coming down. But we're still finishing chances just ahead of expectation, so if we can get the creativity flowing again then we ought to be fine - the defensive drop-off hasn't been anything disastrous, and it's to be expected with the injury/departure disruption there of late.
Having said that, it does feel like we've started to give up the the odd great opportunity more than we were doing - Mansfield probably should've scored to take a point, Northampton to win it. We certainly need to get back to being more dominant so those chances aren't so potentially decisive.
From how many data sets is it calculated, or is it specific to the competition you are in.
ie in premier league is the data used to calculate xG taking just from premier league games? Or is the same criteria used across all games, whatever the level?
Obviously, otherwise I’d have prefixed every statement with ‘FACT’.
But we do know that Matt Bloomfield is a pretty honest, decent, human being. He has heavily implied in several interviews that a major factor in moving was that he felt wanted and would be involved in discussions regarding player recruitment.
it does seem baffling recruitment while exciting that we are spending money. Its all high risk the only proven player at this level is bradley, hopefully the risks come off, i was very surprised berry wasnt on the bench been playing in league 2 could of had a new signing boost for 20.
I suppose you can't say to some expensive, experienced foreign player who always wanted to play for Wycombe...this small child goes straight in the team.
And also from 3 minutes in this post match interview where he categorically states that he’s working with the chief executive and the recruitment team as a group - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0km26db
Comments
But your comments are wasted words. You don’t know how they’re evaluating it. Are they focusing on PPDA, average length of pass, pivoting speed, passes into penalty box, transfer cost, replacement cost, injury likelihood etc etc. I don’t know what Rice and co value either. I don’t know what they’ve observed for Morley. It’s such a waste of time talking about it because it’s all conjecture based on zero knowledge of how the data is evaluated and how the decisions are executed.
No, we don't know our specific process - hence talk of a player not meeting a 'data threshold' is pretty meaningless
Going back to this btw, it's one of the most ridiculous posts I've ever seen on the Gasroom.
First of all, our season isn't "in the bin" after one draw, with 19 games remaining.
Second, we've taken four points from two games since Blooms left. It's not exactly two 3-0 defeats.
Third, it completely ignores that we struggled to beat teams coming to AP and sitting in for a 0-0 for the last two months under Blooms. How was yesterday any different to Mansfield, Bolton, Exeter, Blackpool, Huddersfield? Since Mansfield outplayed us in November and were very unfortunate to lose to Leahy's fluke, every single opposition team to come to AP has sat deep, defended solidly, and shown almost no attacking ambition whatsoever. We've struggled in every such game. Yesterday was just a continuation of that
Talk about throwing one's toys out the pram...
POTFW
I summed up earlier today my feelings and thoughts about how the current regrettable scenario might develop and have no wish to participate in any continuation of such a sadly divisive debate.
Without any doubt the home form has been a struggle for a fair old while in the league now. And we're still 2nd!
Shows how phenomenal the team have been in general this season.
On the contrary, I think Matt Bloomfield wanted Morley, but the powers that be didn’t - presumably because he didn’t fit the data model that us mere mortals aren’t allowed to discuss as we aren’t intelligent enough to understand it.
It feels very much to me that by making an offer to extend the loan they were offering Matt a carrot to keep him happy - albeit a manky Asda wonky carrot (short term loan deal) rather than a Waitrose organic one (signing Morley on a long term deal).
Similar with the Bradley loan deal, some are offering this as proof that Matt had some input into recruitment but my feeling is that was just a low cost option to keep him happy, plus solve an immediate short term crisis at the back.
It seems to me that the real transfer dealings (the four most recent additions) have been done without any input from the football management side - basically, we’re signing these players, you’ve got to work with them and integrate them into your team - and that to my mind is a big part of why Matt walked away. He’s worked wonders to get his team to the top of the league and could see the hard work potentially being trashed by having to integrate players that he doesn’t know will fit his style of play or could disrupt the harmony in the squad.
What was the asking price for Morley then? 1 mill, 2 mill, 5 mill, 10 mill?
High on assumptions, low on facts.
Nail on the head
I think that's a reach, but we can all have our own interpretations
Another great post. Well, it chimes very much with my own view of the situation but an instant downvote suggests that it’s not shared by everyone!
What a surprise.
Another thread ruined by these continuing MB theories. 🤦🤦🤦
If I dare post something that isn't about MB... This X account posts updates weekly on every team's PPG and how this tracks with the expected PPG required to achieve promotion, play offs etc. Our update for this week clearly shows the recent stumbles, but we are (just) tracking ahead of the promotion line for now. We do need to improve the points return though if we are going to make 2nd though imo.
Doesn’t that just plot where you are in the league?
Adjusted for games in hand I suppose
I had a look at our xG and xGA averages yesterday and the gap has been coming down. But we're still finishing chances just ahead of expectation, so if we can get the creativity flowing again then we ought to be fine - the defensive drop-off hasn't been anything disastrous, and it's to be expected with the injury/departure disruption there of late.
Having said that, it does feel like we've started to give up the the odd great opportunity more than we were doing - Mansfield probably should've scored to take a point, Northampton to win it. We certainly need to get back to being more dominant so those chances aren't so potentially decisive.
Can I ask a question about xG please?
From how many data sets is it calculated, or is it specific to the competition you are in.
ie in premier league is the data used to calculate xG taking just from premier league games? Or is the same criteria used across all games, whatever the level?
xGA is zero. There's no way he's coming back now.
Obviously, otherwise I’d have prefixed every statement with ‘FACT’.
But we do know that Matt Bloomfield is a pretty honest, decent, human being. He has heavily implied in several interviews that a major factor in moving was that he felt wanted and would be involved in discussions regarding player recruitment.
Ergo, at Wycombe that wasn’t the case…
Another thread ruined by people moaning about posts mentioning Matt Bloomfield.
massive game Tuesday ....come on boys let's get the 3 points !!
To those who have said we moved away from looking at Morley and signed an "equivalent", just who is that exactly?
In January, We've signed two centre backs, a winger, an attacking midfielder and a self proclaimed "box to box" midfielder.
We haven't signed a number 6 that will sit in front of the back 4 dictating play to my knowledge.
It also appears 5 of them aren’t even match fit yet.
it does seem baffling recruitment while exciting that we are spending money. Its all high risk the only proven player at this level is bradley, hopefully the risks come off, i was very surprised berry wasnt on the bench been playing in league 2 could of had a new signing boost for 20.
And as it turns out, not the case at Luton either.
he said over the weekend the transfers are all on the Board and not him.
Exciting on paper. Really hope they're as exciting out on the pitch.
I suppose you can't say to some expensive, experienced foreign player who always wanted to play for Wycombe...this small child goes straight in the team.
Well I presume someone is misinterpreting what he said then, as he’s mentioned the opposite on several occasions. See my comment here - https://gasroom.org/discussion/comment/386225#Comment_386225
And also from 3 minutes in this post match interview where he categorically states that he’s working with the chief executive and the recruitment team as a group - https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/p0km26db