Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Risso on August 18, 2010, 09:20:39 PM
-
Yes, I know that football existed prior to 1992, but I though the following table was interesting:
(http://i36.tinypic.com/2rzf779.jpg)
44 different teams have been in the Premier League, suprised it's that many to be honest.
Top 7 pretty much as you'd expect.
-
So, all those journalists that said we over-achieved by finishing 6th under O'Neill were wrong? What a surprise!
-
Does this mean we have to give some credit to Doug?
-
Does this mean we have to give some credit to Doug?
and the Baggies are in 33rd place, beneath the likes of Sheffield United. Wolves are worse than Oldham!
-
So out of 6 other clubs who have been in the prem since it started, we have done better then 2 of them?
-
So out of 6 other clubs who have been in the prem since it started, we have done better then 2 of them?
Hardly suprising that is it?
-
So, all those journalists that said we over-achieved by finishing 6th under O'Neill were wrong? What a surprise!
The unfortunate thing is they really believe it.
-
Yes, but it isn't a level playing field if you take it on total points. Points per game is a better guide where we are actually behind Leeds, Newcastle and surprisingly Blackburn. So 8th altogether. No surprise we were above Tottenham as they have only finished above us about 4 or 5 times post 92.
-
we would have easily been top 4 , If it had not been for chelskis money...
-
Man City @ 13 lol. Small club with money.
-
Chelsea Arsenel and Liverpool were just lucky! If CL had gone to the top Four from the begining of the PL we could have been MASSIVE!
-
I'm surprised Spurs were above Everton.
-
Yes, but it isn't a level playing field if you take it on total points. Points per game is a better guide where we are actually behind Leeds, Newcastle and surprisingly Blackburn. So 8th altogether. No surprise we were above Tottenham as they have only finished above us about 4 or 5 times post 92.
Of course it's a 'level playing field'. If they aren't good enough to be in the Premier League that's not our fault. In the past 18 seasons the only clubs better than us are two with worldwide support, one with a multi-billionaire owner and one who made the most inspired managerial appointment in modern history. You can find fault with that if you like but I think it's something to be proud of.
-
one who made the most inspired managerial appointment in modern history
Or lucky
-
one who made the most inspired managerial appointment in modern history
Or lucky
Lucky/inspired. Same thing.
-
I like the all-time top division table better.
Link. (http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/full)
We are entrenched in fifth place. If sixth-placed Chelsea finish 25 points clear of us every year they still wouldn't overtake us for more than 30 years.
-
Worse than that if you were an aspiring chairman to get into the premier gravy train league
Of the 24 teams that have been in and then relegated a quarter of them have continued to drop into the next division (League 1) 4 % of them have gone to league 2.
A quarter of all teams that got into the prem then relagated have slipped even further into the next division.
Maybe not the financial promised land they all think eh?
Get the finances wrong and your team could be ruined for years after
-
I like the all-time top division table better.
Link. (http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/full)
This is not just better. This should be the rightful one.
-
I think that table is a little misleading if we're taking it to be our 'average' position. The fact we've been in the PL every season since it's inception puts us right up there, but if A N Other side had been in every year and finished 11th every year, there average by this guage would probably be 8th or 9th. Given we've only ever had three PL finishes above 6th (2nd in 93, 4th in 96 and 5th in 97) and some awfully low ones aswell, I think if you added up all our finishing positions and divided by the number of PL seasons, we'd be nearer 8th.
EDIT: just checked the figures and a true average of actual finishing positions over the 18 PL seasons is 8th. I also checked where our average points per game would have gotten us each year, which also rounds to 8th. And before I get accused of putting any pro-MON slant on this, I'll just say that the same calculation before he joined us would have shown nerarer 9th, but achieving a relatively consistent 2-3 places above our average is to be expected for the extra financial backing he was given.
-
It's nice to see us sit proudly in 5th position hopefully we can improve on that in the coming years.
-
It's nice to see us sit proudly in 5th position hopefully we can improve on that in the coming years.
The gap between us and 4th is massive, unless one of those clubs gets relegated I can't see it being closed.
It's an interesting stat but the average league finish is more pertinent and a better barometer of how we are doing. Anything above 8th is us doing relatively well, anything below is us under performing and is a useful yardstick with which to measure the new manager assuming that he is backed appropriately by the board.
-
I think that table is a little misleading if we're taking it to be our 'average' position. The fact we've been in the PL every season since it's inception puts us right up there, but if A N Other side had been in every year and finished 11th every year, there average by this guage would probably be 8th or 9th. Given we've only ever had three PL finishes above 6th (2nd in 93, 4th in 96 and 5th in 97) and some awfully low ones aswell, I think if you added up all our finishing positions and divided by the number of PL seasons, we'd be nearer 8th.
Which was the point i was trying to make the other day on another thread ..
We havent been a top 5/6 club for the best part of 70/80 years,
the past 3 years is probably the most consistant any living fan has seen us.
-
I like the all-time top division table better.
Link. (http://www.statto.com/football/stats/england/premier-league/all-time-table/full)
We are entrenched in fifth place. If sixth-placed Chelsea finish 25 points clear of us every year they still wouldn't overtake us for more than 30 years.
I see Glossop North End are rock bottom bottom of that table. Avram Grants next job when he gets the bullet from West ham next month ?
-
Edit. This is a reply to Luke above. Forgot to put the quotes.
I disagree. Based on our past record at any one time we have always been a top 5/6 club, or thereabouts. Historically, to have been a top 5/6 club hasn't meant that club has consistently to be in the top 5/6 nearly every season. It is only the last 15 years or even less when there has been the same few clubs dominating the top of the league. Upto the 60's Liverpool were not even a consistent top division club, and the same applies to Chelsea up to the 90's. Even up to relatively recently ManU and Arsenal were just as capable of finishing in the bottom half of the division as the top half, each season.
-
I think that table is a little misleading if we're taking it to be our 'average' position. The fact we've been in the PL every season since it's inception puts us right up there, but if A N Other side had been in every year and finished 11th every year, there average by this guage would probably be 8th or 9th. Given we've only ever had three PL finishes above 6th (2nd in 93, 4th in 96 and 5th in 97) and some awfully low ones aswell, I think if you added up all our finishing positions and divided by the number of PL seasons, we'd be nearer 8th.
Which was the point i was trying to make the other day on another thread ..
We havent been a top 5/6 club for the best part of 70/80 years,
the past 3 years is probably the most consistant any living fan has seen us.
Only if you're about 10.
What about 1996 - 2000? 4 - 5 - 7 - 6 - 6
Since 1990, we've finished in the top six 10 times, and those 10 times we've finished 2nd twice, 4th and 5th once.
I wonder why we bother getting so aereated about the media talking us down when our own fans are so keen to do it at any opportunity. I wonder how our record since 1990 compares against, say, Tottenham's, and whether their fans talk themselves down as much as we do?
-
I think that table is a little misleading if we're taking it to be our 'average' position. The fact we've been in the PL every season since it's inception puts us right up there, but if A N Other side had been in every year and finished 11th every year, there average by this guage would probably be 8th or 9th. Given we've only ever had three PL finishes above 6th (2nd in 93, 4th in 96 and 5th in 97) and some awfully low ones aswell, I think if you added up all our finishing positions and divided by the number of PL seasons, we'd be nearer 8th.
Which was the point i was trying to make the other day on another thread ..
We havent been a top 5/6 club for the best part of 70/80 years,
the past 3 years is probably the most consistant any living fan has seen us.
Only if you're about 10.
What about 1996 - 2000? 4 - 5 - 7 - 6 - 6
Since 1990, we've finished in the top six 10 times, and those 10 times we've finished 2nd twice, 4th and 5th once.
I wonder why we bother getting so aereated about the media talking us down when our own fans are so keen to do it at any opportunity. I wonder how our record since 1990 compares against, say, Tottenham's, and whether their fans talk themselves down as much as we do?
my mistake about 97-98 i thought we finished 8th.
& im not talking us down .
my point is more often than not there are consistantly 5/6/7 other clubs who finish above us.
they might not always be the same clubs every season granted .
But saying were 5th when its very rare we finish 5th is giving the wrong impression & heightens expectations.
-
I wonder why we bother getting so aereated about the media talking us down when our own fans are so keen to do it at any opportunity. I wonder how our record since 1990 compares against, say, Tottenham's, and whether their fans talk themselves down as much as we do?
I don't think it's about talking ourselves down, it''s about keeping things in a realistic perspective. Whether you take 6th or 8th as our average/natural/regular position, it's still a great achievement in the very competitive Premier League and something we should be proud of. But mentioning the top 6 finishes without balancing it out with the times we've flirted with relegation is something the idiot fans the likes of Spurs do, and I like to think we're better than that!!
-
Does this mean we have to give some credit to Doug?
I'd rather not.
Oh okay then, he was perhaps less incompetent than most other PL chairmen outside the big 4.
-
But saying were 5th when its very rare we finish 5th is giving the wrong impression & heightens expectations.
The point is we've been in the Premier League every season since its inception, and not many other clubs can say that. I would say that, if anything, that table is a truer measure.
For example, Newcastle's failure to be good enough to even be in the premier league for two years since its start is reflected in that table.
-
But saying were 5th when its very rare we finish 5th is giving the wrong impression & heightens expectations.
The point is we've been in the Premier League every season since its inception, and not many other clubs can say that. I would say that, if anything, that table is a truer measure.
For example, Newcastle's failure to be good enough to even be in the premier league for two years since its start is reflected in that table.
& again it gives the wrong impression , Newcastle 8th ?? when they've failed to finish top 10 in 8 of their 16 seasons in the prem.??
im not rubbishing Villa or putting us down i just think those tables dont tell the full story .
-
But saying were 5th when its very rare we finish 5th is giving the wrong impression & heightens expectations.
The point is we've been in the Premier League every season since its inception, and not many other clubs can say that. I would say that, if anything, that table is a truer measure.
For example, Newcastle's failure to be good enough to even be in the premier league for two years since its start is reflected in that table.
As I said above if we're going to take anything practical from this that it has to be meaningful. An average PL finish of 8th place (I think under Lerner the average finish is 7th) gives us a useful starting point on which to judge the performance of the new manager a 5th place overall points total doesn't really reflect as accurately how we've done.
-
Looking at overall points is like saying a player has scored 100 goals for you over 10 years is better than the one who's scored 60 over 3 seasons.
-
I think that table is a little misleading if we're taking it to be our 'average' position. The fact we've been in the PL every season since it's inception puts us right up there, but if A N Other side had been in every year and finished 11th every year, there average by this guage would probably be 8th or 9th. Given we've only ever had three PL finishes above 6th (2nd in 93, 4th in 96 and 5th in 97) and some awfully low ones aswell, I think if you added up all our finishing positions and divided by the number of PL seasons, we'd be nearer 8th.
Which was the point i was trying to make the other day on another thread ..
We havent been a top 5/6 club for the best part of 70/80 years,
the past 3 years is probably the most consistant any living fan has seen us.
Only if you're about 10.
What about 1996 - 2000? 4 - 5 - 7 - 6 - 6
Since 1990, we've finished in the top six 10 times, and those 10 times we've finished 2nd twice, 4th and 5th once.
I wonder why we bother getting so aereated about the media talking us down when our own fans are so keen to do it at any opportunity. I wonder how our record since 1990 compares against, say, Tottenham's, and whether their fans talk themselves down as much as we do?
It seems that it is only acceptable or even desirable to talk down our recent record.
-
At the end of the season we will judge how good or bad our season has been by looking at our final league postion & not how many points we have on the board.
Well thats how i see it anyway .
-
At the end of the season we will judge how good or bad our season has been by looking at our final league postion & not how many points we have on the board.
Well thats how i see it anyway .
A fine and logical argument, which some will throw out in favour of their liking of of tactics and/or style of play, how much they rate the players and thinking manager x would have done better.
I'm with you, though!
-
At the end of the season we will judge how good or bad our season has been by looking at our final league postion & not how many points we have on the board.
Well thats how i see it anyway .
A fine and logical argument, which some will throw out in favour of their liking of of tactics and/or style of play, how much they rate the players and thinking manager x would have done better.
I'm with you, though!
That's what I've been saying for the last three years when others have been trying to pretend that we've had three years of "progression". 6th place is 6th place.
-
That's what I've been saying for the last three years when others have been trying to pretend that we've had three years of "progression". 6th place is 6th place.
I was coming more from the perspective of it being the best indicator of how well we've done as opposed to the regular arguments we have over what I see as the peripheral issues, but you're right.
The only proviso I would add is the points total in comparison to what is needed for 4th place is an guage of how far we need to improve.
-
Luke95 is correct.
The all time Premier table does not show our mean finishing position. It amazes me that people can't grasp that.
-
That table means absolutely fuck all. Sorry, as interesting as it is, it doesnt say anything about where we are today.
We are the 7th team in the League in terms of resources and if we finish above that it is an over-achievement....just like last year was.
-
Does this mean we have to give some credit to Doug?
Absolutely. One of only 7 teams to have stayed in the Preeeeeeemier League since it's inception, is definitely worthy of praise.
-
It seems that it is only acceptable or even desirable to talk down our recent record.
*sigh*
I think barely anyone has "talked down" our recent record, unless you count not regarding sixth as an amazing achievement as "talking down".
-
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
-
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
Agreed. Trying watching the Villa with 12,000 in the ground losing week in week out in the old second division.The club run by old men with no business sense allowing the club to slowly slide towards bankruptcy. No talking down required in that situation.
-
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
Agreed. Trying watching the Villa with 12,000 in the ground losing week in week out in the old second division.The club run by old men with no business sense allowing the club to slowly slide towards bankruptcy. No talking down required in that situation.
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
Agreed. Trying watching the Villa with 12,000 in the ground losing week in week out in the old second division.The club run by old men with no business sense allowing the club to slowly slide towards bankruptcy. No talking down required in that situation.
[/Which very soon lead Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
Agreed. Trying watching the Villa with 12,000 in the ground losing week in week out in the old second division.The club run by old men with no business sense allowing the club to slowly slide towards bankruptcy. No talking down required in that situation.
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
Four clubs have a better record since the Premier League started. All of them have advantages we could only dream of. How about a bit of credit for those responsible??
Agreed. Trying watching the Villa with 12,000 in the ground losing week in week out in the old second division.The club run by old men with no business sense allowing the club to slowly slide towards bankruptcy. No talking down required in that situation.
Which very soon lead to watching in the old third division in front of 49000
-
Epic quote fail there maidstone!
-
That really is the best quote fail ever.
It has a hypnotic quality.
-
Looking at the way this thread has developed I'm amazed at how determined some people are to talk the club down.
If i really wanted to talk the club down i could say as a top 5 club we have massively underachieved the last 20 years by only finishing in the top 5 on 4 occassions.
as i said earlier in the thread ... come the end of the season i will be more concerned where we finish position wise in the league rather that how our all time points total works out.