A question to those who still defend chris hughton

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Assuming you''re refering to me Sir Humphrey. The only thing i have to add is this, no one (including yourself) has yet to provide a coherent explanation as to how after 18 months in charge Chris Hughton has improved the side in terms of peformances and results. As no one has been able to do so, i can only assume my initial instincts were correct, as the stats prove, we are in fact regressing. But i''m happy for somebody out there to convince me otherwise.[/quote]

Welcome back, please provide the etas of which you speak and provide a reference so others can view them and please provide any suggestions you have as to how things could be improved / where you think we should be - this will form the basis of an adult conversation. Regards[/quote]This was posted on another thread, but always glad, in my unspinning way, to help out. All three key indicators are worse than those for last season:

That results leaves the three key indicators like this:1) Points per game 1.055 (compared with 1.157 last season).2) Goals scored per game 0.888 (compared with 1.078 last season).3) Goals conceded per game 1.722 (compared with 1.526 last season).If this were to carry on we would finish with 40 points and a -31 goal difference[/quote]

 

Can''t argue with any of that Purple. But if your logic for this season is to become reality then last season we should have finished with 53 points and a -15 goal difference.

 

 

[PurpleCanary 5,561]

[quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Assuming you''re refering to me Sir Humphrey. The only thing i have to add is this, no one (including yourself) has yet to provide a coherent explanation as to how after 18 months in charge Chris Hughton has improved the side in terms of peformances and results. As no one has been able to do so, i can only assume my initial instincts were correct, as the stats prove, we are in fact regressing. But i''m happy for somebody out there to convince me otherwise.[/quote]

Welcome back, please provide the etas of which you speak and provide a reference so others can view them and please provide any suggestions you have as to how things could be improved / where you think we should be - this will form the basis of an adult conversation. Regards[/quote]This was posted on another thread, but always glad, in my unspinning way, to help out. All three key indicators are worse than those for last season:

That results leaves the three key indicators like this:1) Points per game 1.055 (compared with 1.157 last season).2) Goals scored per game 0.888 (compared with 1.078 last season).3) Goals conceded per game 1.722 (compared with 1.526 last season).If this were to carry on we would finish with 40 points and a -31 goal difference[/quote]

In how many years would a 40 point and -31 goal difference keep us up, just to complete the picture?[/quote]You do remember you have a Ministry for Statistics to look this kind of stuff up? I don''t know, but I suspect two things. One is that in most years 40 points equals safety. Secondly, that a team finishing on 40 points with a -31 GD will end up being placed below any other teams on 40 points.

[Jack Barak 46]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Assuming you''re refering to me Sir Humphrey. The only thing i have to add is this, no one (including yourself) has yet to provide a coherent explanation as to how after 18 months in charge Chris Hughton has improved the side in terms of peformances and results. As no one has been able to do so, i can only assume my initial instincts were correct, as the stats prove, we are in fact regressing. But i''m happy for somebody out there to convince me otherwise.[/quote]

Welcome back, please provide the etas of which you speak and provide a reference so others can view them and please provide any suggestions you have as to how things could be improved / where you think we should be - this will form the basis of an adult conversation. Regards[/quote]This was posted on another thread, but always glad, in my unspinning way, to help out. All three key indicators are worse than those for last season:

That results leaves the three key indicators like this:1) Points per game 1.055 (compared with 1.157 last season).2) Goals scored per game 0.888 (compared with 1.078 last season).3) Goals conceded per game 1.722 (compared with 1.526 last season).If this were to carry on we would finish with 40 points and a -31 goal difference[/quote]

In how many years would a 40 point and -31 goal difference keep us up, just to complete the picture?[/quote]You do remember you have a Ministry for Statistics to look this kind of stuff up? I don''t know, but I suspect two things. One is that in most years 40 points equals safety. Secondly, that a team finishing on 40 points with a -31 GD will end up being placed below any other teams on 40 points.[/quote]

The only reason I asked was because you seemed to have a handle on the numbers, so how many years in the Prem''s history would those numbers have kept us up?

[PurpleCanary 5,561]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Assuming you''re refering to me Sir Humphrey. The only thing i have to add is this, no one (including yourself) has yet to provide a coherent explanation as to how after 18 months in charge Chris Hughton has improved the side in terms of peformances and results. As no one has been able to do so, i can only assume my initial instincts were correct, as the stats prove, we are in fact regressing. But i''m happy for somebody out there to convince me otherwise.[/quote]

Welcome back, please provide the etas of which you speak and provide a reference so others can view them and please provide any suggestions you have as to how things could be improved / where you think we should be - this will form the basis of an adult conversation. Regards[/quote]This was posted on another thread, but always glad, in my unspinning way, to help out. All three key indicators are worse than those for last season:

That results leaves the three key indicators like this:1) Points per game 1.055 (compared with 1.157 last season).2) Goals scored per game 0.888 (compared with 1.078 last season).3) Goals conceded per game 1.722 (compared with 1.526 last season).If this were to carry on we would finish with 40 points and a -31 goal difference[/quote]

 

Can''t argue with any of that Purple. But if your logic for this season is to become reality then last season we should have finished with 53 points and a -15 goal difference.

 

 

[/quote]I assume that is based on where we were after 18 games, nutty? Fine. But by the same token in the 1994-95 season, based on our points total at this time of year, we ended up qualifying for Europe...[:P]Seriously, I am not predicting anything. But these are the only figures that are unspun. All other figures, based on parts of the season or against certain opponents and not others, are a form of spin.

[nutty nigel 7,534]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"][quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]Assuming you''re refering to me Sir Humphrey. The only thing i have to add is this, no one (including yourself) has yet to provide a coherent explanation as to how after 18 months in charge Chris Hughton has improved the side in terms of peformances and results. As no one has been able to do so, i can only assume my initial instincts were correct, as the stats prove, we are in fact regressing. But i''m happy for somebody out there to convince me otherwise.[/quote]

Welcome back, please provide the etas of which you speak and provide a reference so others can view them and please provide any suggestions you have as to how things could be improved / where you think we should be - this will form the basis of an adult conversation. Regards[/quote]This was posted on another thread, but always glad, in my unspinning way, to help out. All three key indicators are worse than those for last season:

That results leaves the three key indicators like this:1) Points per game 1.055 (compared with 1.157 last season).2) Goals scored per game 0.888 (compared with 1.078 last season).3) Goals conceded per game 1.722 (compared with 1.526 last season).If this were to carry on we would finish with 40 points and a -31 goal difference[/quote]

 

Can''t argue with any of that Purple. But if your logic for this season is to become reality then last season we should have finished with 53 points and a -15 goal difference.

 

 

[/quote]I assume that is based on where we were after 18 games, nutty? Fine. But by the same token in the 1994-95 season, based on our points total at this time of year, we ended up qualifying for Europe...[:P]Seriously, I am not predicting anything. But these are the only figures that are unspun. All other figures, based on parts of the season or against certain opponents and not others, are a form of spin.[/quote]

 

Suggesting that these unspun facts can be used as a basis to forecast the remainder of the season is spinning so fast I''m getting dizzy Purple[:)]

 

 

[Jack Barak 46]

TCWE any comment? Anything to add to the thread you started? Any insights to share?

[Jack Barak 46]

[quote user="Sir Humphrey Appleby"]TCWE any comment? Anything to add to the thread you started? Any insights to share?[/quote]

TCWE i will try and bump this thread again to give you a chance to share your views, looking forward to hearing them.

[Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . . 0]

Only thing i''d add to this thread is roughly 14 hours after i posed the question, nobody has yet provided any answers as to how, after 18 months in charge, chris hughton is delivering improved peformances and results. Again, i would suggest this is because we are not improving, but in fact regressing under his management. Still, bump on sir arthur. Bump on.

[Herman 9,765]

We are neither progressing nor regressing. We are stuck in the same position we have been in since we hit this division. It is one step forward, one step backwards. And that is why there is a Hughton in/out division. Neither one way or t''other.

[Yellow Bird 0]

Ok, they get rid of Hughton and bring who in? I''m not saying I''m keen for him to stay and things are going from bad to worse, but I''m struggling to come up with a decent replacement. Not our choice anyway,I know.

[Indy 3,300]

[quote user="Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . ."]After around 18 months in charge, including having the biggest transfer budget in NCFC history, how exactly, are we progressing and improving as a side in your eyes?[/quote]

 

Well on PAPER, we have thee best squad of players ever assembled.

We finished 11th last season, even though we were gifted the WBA & Man City wins according to some.

We had the best run in the top division of 10 games.

We sit 14th in the league and have only been in the bottom 3 for three weeks in total under Hughton!

 

So when  you look at these facts it looks good!

 

But it has to be the most confusing time to be a City fan, on the one hand we are in our thrid season of top flight football, we are U18 FA cup holders, we are debt free, we fill our ground, we have a stable board and we have spent the most money ever!

 

Yet even I am not convinced that this current Manager and coaching team are movingg us forward......is it that Hughton just does not fit the fans requirements?

[Tony Cottee Woz Ere . . . 0]

Indy, 18 months on, the peformances are not improving, and as you just pointed out yourself we are actually worse off than last season. Also i don''t see how only being in the bottom 3 for three weeks under Hughton has any relevance what so ever. Still waiting for an explanation as to how things are improving and progressing..........................

[Indy 3,300]

Well if you are grasping at stats to back Hughton, only being in the bottom 3 for 3 weeks of 18 month''s points to us never really being in too much troouble! not like Sunderland, Wigan last year!......

 

I''m not defending Hughton as I said I don''t think we are improving but then again it''s not as bad as it could be!

 

Yes the style we play is rubbish but we do get enough results to stay clear of trouble!

 

I don''t knowthe answer, but Palace, Sunderland and now Fulham are all improving under new managers!

[the bristol nest 0]

It''s taken 5 pages to elicit hal a dozen decent responses.

Nuff Said, purple and laterlly Indy probably reflect my view on the situation.

The stats thus far this season say that we have not progressed on the field.Indys'' point shows the wider picture. If we go down then we are in a better position than in recent relegatiuon years.

With whom do we replace Hughton? I have no idea therefore would like to see improvement/vchanges in the coaching team.

We do not have the resources of other sides in this league so have to have a sensible view of our potential but we must also have ambition.

Our squad looks good on paper but is static on the pitch.

To those who insult the op for being morons for not agreeing with their fatuous responses: grow up.You stifer debate and read like childish show offs.

Personally i can see improvement off the pitch but not on it for any consistant amount of games.

Let''s wait until after Palace to judge our Xmas run.

[the bristol nest 0]

BTW has Adams continued to improve the up and coming players?

Would DM consider replacing Calderwood ( for example) with Neil Adamsas assistant.It would for allow some consistancy and a plan for the future.

[PurpleCanary 5,561]

[quote user="the bristol nest"]It''s taken 5 pages to elicit hal a dozen decent responses.

Nuff Said, purple and laterlly Indy probably reflect my view on the situation.

The stats thus far this season say that we have not progressed on the field.Indys'' point shows the wider picture. If we go down then we are in a better position than in recent relegatiuon years.

With whom do we replace Hughton? I have no idea therefore would like to see improvement/vchanges in the coaching team.

We do not have the resources of other sides in this league so have to have a sensible view of our potential but we must also have ambition.

Our squad looks good on paper but is static on the pitch.

To those who insult the op for being morons for not agreeing with their fatuous responses: grow up.You stifer debate and read like childish show offs.

Personally i can see improvement off the pitch but not on it for any consistant amount of games.

Let''s wait until after Palace to judge our Xmas run.[/quote]Yes in general  (with one caveat) and yes in highlighted particular. For what it''s worth I said at the time (and still believe) that our November results (starting with West Ham) meant Hughton would be here until the end of the season. I would be very surprised if the board acted from now on (unless they have someone lined up they are entirely convinced will be markedly better).And Hughton and the coaching team are a package. And the coaching team can only be as good as the instructions given it by the manager. No-one has produced any evidence here that Trollope and Calderwood are no good. There might be a change there, but I wouldn''t assume for a moment it would bring an improvement.

[Alby :) 0]

We''ve clearly gone backwards under Hughton.

Unfortunately some fans will just not accept that Hughton is not a very good manager.