MACSTATS

[Snowball]

League results only 2010

1 Nottingham Forest 9 6 0 3 3 3 14 6 +8 18 2.00
2 Swansea City 8 4 4 0 5 1 8 3 +5 16 2.00
3 Newcastle United 8 4 3 1 3 2 17 8 +9 15 1.88
4 Reading 7 4 0 3 1 2 9 10 -1 12 1.71

5 West Bromwich Albion 9 4 3 2 2 0 15 12 +3 15 1.67
6 Coventry City 9 4 3 2 4 1 11 10 +1 15 1.67

7 Sheffield Wednesday 9 5 0 4 1 3 11 11 0 15 1.67
8 Derby County 8 4 1 3 3 2 14 10 +4 13 1.63
9 Cardiff City 8 3 3 2 2 1 14 11 +3 12 1.50
10 Scunthorpe United 10 4 3 3 2 1 15 15 0 15 1.50
11 Ipswich Town 9 3 4 2 1 1 11 12 -1 13 1.44
12 Leicester City 10 3 5 2 3 4 11 7 +4 14 1.40
13 Middlesbrough 9 3 3 3 2 4 9 8 +1 12 1.33
14 Crystal Palace 7 3 0 4 2 3 6 8 -2 9 1.29
15 Sheffield United 8 3 1 4 3 2 9 10 -1 10 1.25
16 Barnsley 10 4 0 6 3 1 13 14 -1 12 1.20
17 Blackpool 11 3 4 4 3 2 15 15 0 13 1.18
18 Watford 6 2 1 3 2 1 10 8 +2 7 1.17
19 Bristol City 8 2 3 3 1 4 8 15 -7 9 1.13
20 Doncaster Rovers 9 3 1 5 3 2 9 12 -3 10 1.11
21 Preston North End 9 3 1 5 3 3 11 19 -8 10 1.11
22 Plymouth Argyle 8 2 2 4 1 2 8 9 -1 8 1.00
23 Peterborough United 8 2 0 6 1 5 5 12 -7 6 0.75
24 Queens Park Rangers 7 1 1 5 0 4 5 13 -8 4 0.57

[SLAMMED]

No one cares...

[Wimb]

A League table covering ONLY league games, starting with Mac's first game



P W D L CS FtS F A GD Pt PPG
1 Nottingham Forest 12 8 1 3 6 4 19 6 +13 25 2.08
2 West Bromwich Albion 11 6 3 2 3 0 20 13 +7 21 1.91
3 Swansea City 11 5 6 0 7 2 11 4 +7 21 1.91
4 Newcastle United 11 5 5 1 5 3 21 10 +11 20 1.82
5 Coventry City 12 6 3 3 6 2 13 12 +1 21 1.75
6 Leicester City 11 4 5 2 3 4 13 8 +5 17 1.55
7 Ipswich Town 11 4 4 3 2 1 15 15 0 16 1.45
8 Sheffield Wednesday 11 5 1 5 1 4 13 15 -2 16 1.45
9 Crystal Palace 10 4 2 4 3 4 10 10 0 14 1.40
10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40
11 Blackpool 12 4 4 4 4 2 17 15 +2 16 1.33
12 Barnsley 12 5 1 6 3 1 16 16 0 16 1.33
13 Cardiff City 10 3 4 3 2 2 18 16 +2 13 1.30
14 Plymouth Argyle 11 4 2 5 2 3 13 11 +2 14 1.27
15 Derby County 11 4 2 5 4 5 14 14 0 14 1.27
16 Sheffield United 11 4 2 5 4 2 12 13 -1 14 1.27
17 Middlesbrough 12 4 3 5 3 5 13 12 +1 15 1.25
18 Scunthorpe United 12 4 3 5 2 2 16 21 -5 15 1.25
19 Doncaster Rovers 11 4 1 6 4 3 11 13 -2 13 1.18
20 Watford 9 2 3 4 3 2 13 12 +1 9 1.00
21 Bristol City 11 2 5 4 1 4 12 20 -8 11 1.00
22 Peterborough United 11 3 1 7 1 6 11 19 -8 10 0.91
23 Preston North End 11 3 1 7 3 5 11 23 -12 10 0.91
24 Queens Park Rangers 10 2 2 6 0 5 8 18 -10 8 0.80

Can you also do a table based on Rodgers last 10 games please........

[Snowball]

A League table covering ONLY league games, starting with Mac's first game



P W D L CS FtS F A GD Pt PPG
1 Nottingham Forest 12 8 1 3 6 4 19 6 +13 25 2.08
2 West Bromwich Albion 11 6 3 2 3 0 20 13 +7 21 1.91
3 Swansea City 11 5 6 0 7 2 11 4 +7 21 1.91
4 Newcastle United 11 5 5 1 5 3 21 10 +11 20 1.82
5 Coventry City 12 6 3 3 6 2 13 12 +1 21 1.75
6 Leicester City 11 4 5 2 3 4 13 8 +5 17 1.55
7 Ipswich Town 11 4 4 3 2 1 15 15 0 16 1.45
8 Sheffield Wednesday 11 5 1 5 1 4 13 15 -2 16 1.45
9 Crystal Palace 10 4 2 4 3 4 10 10 0 14 1.40
10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40
11 Blackpool 12 4 4 4 4 2 17 15 +2 16 1.33
12 Barnsley 12 5 1 6 3 1 16 16 0 16 1.33
13 Cardiff City 10 3 4 3 2 2 18 16 +2 13 1.30
14 Plymouth Argyle 11 4 2 5 2 3 13 11 +2 14 1.27
15 Derby County 11 4 2 5 4 5 14 14 0 14 1.27
16 Sheffield United 11 4 2 5 4 2 12 13 -1 14 1.27
17 Middlesbrough 12 4 3 5 3 5 13 12 +1 15 1.25
18 Scunthorpe United 12 4 3 5 2 2 16 21 -5 15 1.25
19 Doncaster Rovers 11 4 1 6 4 3 11 13 -2 13 1.18
20 Watford 9 2 3 4 3 2 13 12 +1 9 1.00
21 Bristol City 11 2 5 4 1 4 12 20 -8 11 1.00
22 Peterborough United 11 3 1 7 1 6 11 19 -8 10 0.91
23 Preston North End 11 3 1 7 3 5 11 23 -12 10 0.91
24 Queens Park Rangers 10 2 2 6 0 5 8 18 -10 8 0.80

Can you also do a table based on Rodgers last 10 games please........

Table for the time period covering Rodgers last games

1 Newcastle United 10 7 1 2 5 1 17 7 +10 22 2.20
2 Nottingham Forest 10 5 5 0 4 1 16 6 +10 20 2.00
3 West Bromwich Albion 9 5 2 2 3 3 20 8 +12 17 1.89
4 Swansea City 10 5 3 2 5 3 11 9 +2 18 1.80
5 Leicester City 10 5 2 3 5 1 13 12 +1 17 1.70
6 Barnsley 9 4 3 2 2 1 13 11 +2 15 1.67
7 Ipswich Town 10 3 7 0 4 3 10 6 +4 16 1.60
8 Doncaster Rovers 10 5 1 4 4 1 16 13 +3 16 1.60
9 Watford 10 5 1 4 3 4 14 14 0 16 1.60
10 Cardiff City 9 4 2 3 3 1 14 11 +3 14 1.56
11 Blackpool 10 4 3 3 4 1 19 12 +7 15 1.50
12 Queens Park Rangers 10 4 2 4 1 1 20 19 +1 14 1.40
13 Sheffield United 10 4 2 4 4 3 13 15 -2 14 1.40
14 Bristol City 10 3 4 3 1 2 15 15 0 13 1.30
15 Crystal Palace 11 3 5 3 2 3 13 14 -1 14 1.27
16 Derby County 10 3 3 4 3 5 9 12 -3 12 1.20
17 Scunthorpe United 10 3 3 4 1 3 10 17 -7 12 1.20
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10
19 Middlesbrough 9 2 3 4 1 4 12 12 0 9 1.00
20 Preston North End 10 2 4 4 2 5 8 13 -5 10 1.00
21 Plymouth Argyle 9 2 1 6 1 5 5 12 -7 7 0.78
22 Peterborough United 10 1 4 5 2 2 13 17 -4 7 0.70
23 Coventry City 10 1 3 6 1 5 8 17 -9 6 0.60
24 Sheffield Wednesday 10 1 2 7 2 5 6 19 -13 5 0.50

Mac is averaging (league only) .3 points more per game (overall) or an extra 14 points a season
based on Rodgers IMPROVED form

[Hoop Blah]

So he's continued the slight improvement we saw over the last few weeks under Rodgers.

Good on him!

[Snowball]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

[Snowball]

So he's continued the slight improvement we saw over the last few weeks under Rodgers.

Good on him!

Now he QUADRUPLED the improvement.

Rodger's had gone from a point a game and improved it to 1.1 points per game

Mac took "the improvement" from .1 to .4, ie four times


Of course Mac had the advantage of signing Kish and the excellent Griffin (who thought of those signings?)

And the return to fitness and form of Long (who got hi to get sharp again?)

And the growing confidence of Kebe (who managed that?)

And MILLS (who was keeping him out of Rodger's side?)

[Hoop Blah]

I'm not knocking his management Snowball, why are you being so defensive!!

In fairness, it's been rumoured that Rodgers first tried to sign Griffen in the previous window. In the same way as we'd been tracking Thorvaldsson and Mills before Rodgers was here I expect the signing was one, like most of the others, that the chief scout and manager deliberated over together.

I've no idea what was happening with Mills under Rodgers, but I don't think McDermott brought him straight back into the side, so I expect that there was still a fitness concern over him. It seems an odd one though.

I do think McDermott has got more out of the likes of Long, Gunnarsson and Kebe. But at the same time I'm not sure some of the others have performed as well as they did under Rodgers.

We're getting more consistent, look a lot harder to beat, and confidence is massively up as a result. That's great work by McDermott, that can't be denied. I don't see the need to start rubbishing a lot of the good work done by Rodgers at the same time though. Rodgers tried to run before he could walk, and that wasn't going to bring about short term results (which he needed, and was a mistake on his part) but it could well be a positive factor in what McDermott is getting out of them now.

[Snowball]

I was a Rodgers fan and sorry to see him go.

I had serious doubts about Mac (who?)


But I really think the bloke is a good old-fashioned manager
who cuts to the chase, doesn't bamboozle players, and
thinks of ways to make each one a better player (ie play to their strengths)


PERHAPS we'd've turned it round under BR, and we've had a few solid beatings under Mac
to match some of those under BR, but the new guy does seem to be a master, and IMO
is on the way to Manager of the Year.

He's turned Shane around, improved Kebe, got another six months out of Gunnarson,
brought Mills in from the cold and made him captain, and he never talks more than
one game ahead. Bloody good manager.

PS Not being defensive. It's not "MY" team or "MY" management, but your post suggested
that Mac had merely continued an improvement that was coming anyway. I dispute that.

Rodgers was on 21 from 21 when he left. If he got 1.1 points a game for the next 25 that would have been 48.5 points, say 49 and possibly relegated
whereas, even with inheriting the bad start, Mac's 1.4 p.p.game would have got us to 56 points and certain safety

After his DDL start Mac is now picking up the point equivalent of a 79 point season

So really, he is doing a LOT better than Rodgers

[Hoop Blah]

I don't see why the progress would've been on a linear scale though snowball, especially with the effect form, confidence, momentum and the favourable run of fixtures we've just had would've had IF we'd continued the improvements I could see developing under Rodgers.

It might've gone the other way, and as you say and I totally agree, it seems McDermott has connected with the players very well and got them playing to a system (or roles within it at least) they now understand.

Interestingly enough, the actual system we've used in this improved run is basically the same one as Rodgers was trying to deploy, albeit not with the emphasis on being able to pass the ball to one another.

[Millsy]

No one cares...

Those of us with more than a G in maths GCSE do.

Thanks Snowball, interesting as ever.

[Blue Hooped Moose]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

Point being what exactly?? these games should be excluded?

[Mad Dog's Ghost]

Dull and pointless Snowball, as ever.

[prostak]

No one cares...

Those of us with more than a G in maths GCSE do.

Thanks Snowball, interesting as ever.

Those of us with more than a G in maths GCSE can probably appreciate that the increase from 1.1 to 1.4 is not four times that from 1.0 to 1.1 tbf.

[Millsy]

No one cares...

Those of us with more than a G in maths GCSE do.

Thanks Snowball, interesting as ever.

Those of us with more than a G in maths GCSE can probably appreciate that the increase from 1.1 to 1.4 is not four times that from 1.0 to 1.1 tbf.

Hehe fair play I agree I'm not talking about specifics, just SLAMMED's assertion that "no one cares" about these stats (unless he was talking abotu something else in which cae I apologise). The number of pages generated suggests that we do. It's interesting stuff that generates good dicussion. I never liked the appointment of BM but such stats and the resultant discussion is great stuff and makes me re-think my antagonism to the appointment.

Keep up the good work Snowball.

[Wimb]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

Point being what exactly?? these games should be excluded?

Yeah ok Snowball, lets take away those first three games and go on the last 7, tell you what, do the table again looking at Rodgers final 7 games, of which his record was 3 wins and 2 draws with 2 defeats.....

See how easily stats can turn against you

It's almost too easy.

[Snowball]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

Point being what exactly?? these games should be excluded?

POINT being that this comparison presents Rodgers in the best possible light and Mac in the worst possible light.

This was Rodgers after a pre-season and 11 games of trial and error. This was Rodgers when he had already had 16-17 games and six MONTHS to get it right.

MAC, OTOH had to come in with just a few days to try and turn things round.
So he scraped a draw first game with a last-minute goal, (even tho we played well)
then drew at home, then had that 4-1 tonking at Plymouth.

But by the fourth game he managed a win, and since then he has managed 4 wins in 7 games
and defeats by three high-flying clubs Forest, Sheffield United and Blackpool, the
equivalent of a 79 point season, the play-offs.

When you factor in his FA Cup exploits it's W7 D2 L3, Championship form.

It's surely not unreasonable to consider a manager's last 12 games?

Mac's first three (of ten) paint a false picture. His next 7 (league) or next 12 (League & Cup) make the picture clearer.

[Snowball]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

Point being what exactly?? these games should be excluded?

Yeah ok Snowball, lets take away those first three games and go on the last 7, tell you what, do the table again looking at Rodgers final 7 games, of which his record was 3 wins and 2 draws with 2 defeats.....
See how easily stats can turn against you
It's almost too easy.

Disagree. You're saying totally ignore two-thirds of Rodger's games, a whole 14 games of "practice", plus the pre-season, plus two League Cup games.

And anyway, 12 points from 7 (Mac) is better than 11 from 7 (Rodgers) and equals an extra 6-7 points in the season

I'm saying any new manager needs a few games to understand his players, change things to his pattern etc and he should be judged on a long run of games

But some clowns don't think drawing with and beating Liverpool counts,
just as beating Burnley doesn't count, and drawing with WBA and then beating them doesn't count.

Showing FA Cup games makes Mac's stats so much better than Rodgers, and the cup DOES matter

We would never have beaten Liverpool under Brendan

If that is so, seven games is hopelessly short

[Snowball]

10 Reading 10 4 2 4 1 2 12 16 -4 14 1.40 per game MAC's first ten league games (14 points more per season)
18 Reading 10 3 2 5 1 1 14 18 -4 11 1.10 per game Brendan's last ten league games

I think this presents Mac in a poorer light as he STARTED with DDL 3-7

Since then he has picked up 12 points from 7 games 9-9 and had DWWDW 9-6 in the cup (W7 D2 L3 18-15)

Point being what exactly?? these games should be excluded?

Yeah ok Snowball, lets take away those first three games and go on the last 7, tell you what, do the table again looking at Rodgers final 7 games, of which his record was 3 wins and 2 draws with 2 defeats.....
See how easily stats can turn against you
It's almost too easy.

Or to phrase it another way. Take all a manager's games after the first three, 18 for Rodgers
7 for Mac..W5 D4 L9 Rodgers 19 points from 18 games a 48.56 season-equivalent versus Mac's 79 point season

Yeah, it's close.

[Wimb]

Or to phrase it another way. Take all a manager's games after the first three, 18 for Rodgers
7 for Mac..W5 D4 L9 Rodgers 19 points from 18 games a 48.56 season-equivalent versus Mac's 79 point season

Yeah, it's close.

The continuing lol of all this is despite talking about 'clearer pictures' and 'fair to judge' and scewed stats' you utterly miss the point of why people laugh at your statistical analysis.

You talk about judging a manager on his last few games after he's had a chance to settle into the role. Now it's impossible to decide just when he 'settled into the role' but clearly after the QPR game Rodgers had some sort of a wake up call,by that stage he'd got in the players he wanted too (though he admitted he was still short 1 or 2 players) and decided to take us back to basics, 4-4-2.

From that game on Rodgers was actually doing about as well as Mac is at the moment, picking up the points against the bad teams and losing to high flying ones, with the odd exception thrown in. (Palace for Rodgers, Maccy D Plymouth)

Despite saying 'he had a full pre season and the first 11 games etc etc, you again ignore non statistical outside factors such as coming into a new club selling a huge number of players, whilst bedding in new signings and fielding young players who have a handful of Championship matches under their belts. Also as he's said and the Chairman said at the time, Rodgers was taking a long term view and he admits he fecked up by perhaps doing too much too soon.

Then you ignore what has gone in Brians favour from the day he took charge. He's managed, rather recently, a lot of the players in the side when he managed the reserves, he knows the club inside out and he's got a team with half a season under their belts.

NOBODY SAYS THE CUP ISNT IMPORTANT, to that end Maccy D is having a great run no doubt what so ever. What you keep bloody missing is the fact that Rodgers never managed an FA Cup game ffs, so quite how you can compare the 2 in that regard baffles me. The only competition you can compare is one they both competed in and that is the league, you can speculate all you want on personal opinion that 'Rodgers would never have beaten Liverpool' but you have no bloody idea and nobody ever will so that's an opinion not a stat.

Once again Snowball, and everyone else, this isnt a 'Rodgers was sooooo good after all!!!!" thread, its a simple argument that stats can be pointless when there isn't an even playing field.

Brian has had a good run as of late in the cup and in the league, but the sample size for both managers is pathetically small and in literal terms we're only marginally better off (league wise) then we were when Brian came in.

However as many have said thanks to some good management and decent loan signings, plus the return to form of 1 or 2 players, we seem to be able to get a few more results.

Personally I think Brendan would have got the same results if he had Griff in (and sorted his personal beef with Mills) but he did also make some baffling decisions in the short term and his press conferences left much to be desired. Still he had the potential.

But now its all about MACATTACK and hopefully it'll be 3 straight home wins tomorrow .o/