Search results

Essentially. They are saying that the stats suggest a margin for error in PPG of + 6.3% or – 5.4% based on actual outcomes over the last 3 years. The cynic in me immediately wonders why just 3 years when the competition has existed for hundreds... possibly as 3 years gives Tranmere the best...

You can't just apply the model to the bottom end of the table & not the top. Listen, it has no effect on us as we will win the league whatever method is used. I have no beef with Tranmere or Peterborough & sympathise with both in this scenario but straight PPG is the method that will have...

They'd need to win 11-0 to get out of relegation spots so whenever someone trots out the "3 points from safety" line as Nicola Palios has done repeatedly they immediately lose some credibility.

You'd also end up with a 7 team playoff in League 1 & 11 in Championship if they can't compete etc. This in itself is a logistical nightmare with an odd number of teams & having to stage extra games. Not to mention the team finishing 2nd potentially losing out to a team who finished in the...

I totally get it & it would be harsh to be relegated on PPG but causing such huge upheaval to the entire football pyramid just to stop you being relegated won't be given the time of day. Can you answer why the % Margin proposed is over last 3 years if you've supposedly modelled it over 10...

I've changed my mind, hope they get relegated on PPG :emoji_laughing:

Further analysis & trawling through other posts on Twitter etc & it is clear that this would cause a huge raft of issues that will be ongoing for years; 13 team playoffs - odd number of teams making format difficult, will take a long time to complete when we're trying to say playing on isn't...

Would be a gamble for sure.

From my understanding, we're promoted regardless so can't be accused of bias but... By the calculations somebody else posted earlier, we'd end up with approximately 13 teams in the playoffs - EFL have already (rightly) stated there will be no extended playoffs. If we went with their no...

It was simulated on Football Manager which historically under rates our players & coaching team massively.

No, it's basically double counting. It's like Matt Hancock's 50,000 nurses claim!

Anyone see MacAnthony's latest Twitter rants? Essentially saying other clubs (and renowned Football Finance guy Kieran Maguire) are exaggerating & true cost to resume is circa £250k

Bit embarrassing this...

Not convinced by him defensively for a LB but if we stick with 3 at the back he could do a job at wing back. Good set piece taker too. Wherever he goes he's going to take a hefty drop in pay, thought to be on £28k p/w at Everton.

I didn't thankfully, others did though & reshared it.

At it again, this is one of the worst. Boss claims to have edge over Coventry with this promotion stat Ainsworth doesn't mention us once in the interview, states there was a possibility they could get into 2nd thanks to a decent run in. :emoji_rolling_eyes:

It's nothing but a soundbite unfortunately. EFL will cover the upfront cost but deduct it back from the clubs' solidarity payments.

Sunderland claim theirs was £12.5m at start of the season, down from a staggering £40m! They signed/loaned 5 more players since then although will have recouped some of that outlay by loaning out McGeady Charlie Methven opens up on Sunderland wage bill, finances and transfer business

No, no, surely not - complete coincidence, it's all about integrity! :emoji_laughing:

Quite right, we'd be just short. My point stands though, it's incredibly unlikely we'd win them all but just as likely as this prediction that we'd slump out of the Autos having lost 3 all season.