Canaries north

As you say "You could certainly tailor a programme strictly for yourself, harvesting only certain kinds of data that you feel apply to you and get a a very different outcome from a wider, shared programme that you later filter" The thing I don't understand is if this is able to be done on a reasonable budget, why are the big football data companies not offering this. Im sure most clubs would want the data to be personalised to their needs. These companies are specialists in the field. They must know what clubs are looking for and be able to scale it to sell for a cheaper price than individual clubs going it on their own. Are we going to collection all our own data? With so many game every week in world football this can't lbe realistic. it also worries me that since the spurs game when relegated we have been told we are data driven. We have set up a data team. Our signings since have been very poor. Do you trust the club to use data well as even with the Americans help it hasn't done us much good in the last few years. The more data driven we have apparently become the worse the signings have been.

You obviously know a lot more about this and a lot more than me, to be honest that wouldn't take a huge amount. What I take from what you are saying when you say one size fits all data will be defunct. Surely a business that only does football data will know this and will be able to provide all the data clubs need with the ability to search for the fine details individual clubs want. Are we still going to get the raw data from one of the main providers and then use our own systems to fine tune the results? If not then I don't see how we will collate all the information needed without a huge budget. I just struggle to believe that we, with the budget we will be able to invest in this, will be able to outsmart companies that have been doing this for years and provide a better product for us, it's their only job. When you say questions and prompts Surely the data companies would be able to set this up for every clubs needs and end up doing it a lot cheaper. I am not doubting anything you are saying it just looks like something these companies would either already offer or be able to offer cheaper than doing it ourselves.

I will happily admit I don't have an idea how much this will all cost. I also don't know how much of an advantage it will give us for that outlay. I do know that there are companies that specialise in football data and I will guess spend a lot more than we will on collecting and analysing the data. Yes, this will mean we are getting the same data as everyone else. But if that data is better than what we can with our finances put together on the same player then what advantage it gives us I am not sure. Outsourcing might not get you a bespoke product but it's normally more cost effective.

I do believe data does have a part to play going forward but here comes the but. Didn't we start looking and using data a lot more after relegation when the Americans started to get involved with them also helping us in this regard. If this is the case can someone please explain to me our recruitment from the old people's home. Information is only as good as the people reading it. At the moment we have not used the data well and this was supposed to be with the Americans help. I can also understand why a baseball team would find it very useful. Just like cricket, it's an individual sport played in a team game. Football has so many moving parts. It will help but for me it's not as easy as baseball to make work. Can it give you an edge, yes, has the edge already passed us by, probably. For any edge you have to either be the first or have more money to put into it than anyone else. My friend is a Watford fan, I know, the poor guy. He has looked into the pozo teams and they were one of the first to have a large scouting network in South America. This helped udinese pick up good and cheap players that they would play and then sell at a huge profit. The main problem was the big teams caught on and did the same. Now all their teams are struggling. Yes I think we should use data to a certain extent but we are not the first and do we really think on our budget we can do it that much better? From what i have heard we are not doing anything radical but just tweaking the way we collect the data. Is this really going to give us as big an advantage to make the outlay worth while ? I guess time will tell.

The Birmingham manager was doing well until he was removed for a vanity manager. I believe they were top 6 when sacked with a weaker squad than us.

I think you have summed up livermore tuesday night. Breaking things up, playing simple passes to more skillful players and out fighting Barnes. Also he would fit in well as he is the same age as most of our players

I'm a bit of a luddite so dont know how these figures are put together, but despite the 2 assists from Sara how did he get a better score than Livermore. He held the midfield and broke up play so well. Neat and tidy with the ball as well. The eye test for me does not agree with the scores.

I also think your reading a lot into that The comment was a reply to another comment saying if it was a Rugby Post the person in question would not have bothered reading. To my mind the moment you post WSL wages most people who are just into WSL or just men's football or love both would look as it's fair to say it will come back to how much the men are paid at some point. Strangely that is how it turned out.

Bu But if the title was why aren't Rugby players paid the same as footballers then I think you would look. The moment it says WSL wages you know it will be about the comparison to men's football. The answer by the way to why aren't Rugby players paid the same is revenue. Pure and simple. The same also applies to the WSL at this moment in time. It might not in the future but that is where it is.

The 3 times I believe is because a number of games are on free view via the BBC. The championship is only on sky? You might also have more up to date figures than me but from what I have seen WSL gets an average of 125k on all channels and championship games only on sky get 200k. If the figures I have seen are correct and they might not be as some were taken from a debate on how much sky pays the SPL, but that wouldn't be a fair comparison. If the championship was on the BBC I still believed more people would watch the championship. This might change but at the moment that is my belief.

At the time I hated it, now I love it. Its a retro classic.

In my mind the women's game has been asked to run before it could walk. The money put in by Sky and the BBC probably breaks even on the cost to produce with all that goes into covering a game compared with the viewing figures. The problem is the average gates mean at the moment most clubs are having to be funded by the men's teams. Also one of the reason the Premier league makes so much money is international tv rights. I would love to see the day when the women's game is bringing in as much money as the men's but unless people start attending and paying the silly money we pay to see the men's game how can they pay more money. I believe 400k is the most a female footballer has been sold for. That is less than the record in the men's game in 1968.

I would be very very surprised. 20k a year is what was quoted. My guess is the player was meaning to say year but said month by accident.

I'm not sure but you might be right about webber when he first came in being a data man but I don't remember that as his main attribute. I can understand data being of huge importance in baseball and cricket. As I see it in football it is less important. Not useless but of less importance. It was an edge when first used but now I see it as the norm. Does that mean we shouldn't use it, of course not but it's not the be all and end all. Budget is far more important. You can have great data and find great talents but if everyone else has the same data but a bigger budget you are not going to get those players. If as said we have been using data more since the Attanasios became involved it is not working. As you have said it has to be aligned with the manager. That was what we were told when Webber came in. The style was set and managers would be appointed who fit that style. "You can change manager but not the whole playing staff" That all made sense but we have gone so off message. We are now in the situation where if and more likely when the new manager comes in we will need one who likes to play with no DM, an old slow central defence and 6 millon wingers. We might sack Wagner and have to re-employ him as he is the only manager who likes to play that way.

It does worry me that he is advertised as a data man. I know its the fashion at the moment but haven't we tried to go down the data route already. I hope his use of data is better than the data team Webber is supposed to have set up with the help of some data driven Americans. If data is the way we have been doing our business since the Americans started getting involved then I worry. I could have told you 30+ year olds who haven't played many games for a year or 2 being asked to play Saturday, Wednesday, Saturday is not going to work and I'm an idiot who can't work a spreadsheet.