The Title Race 2017/18 | Done and dusted.

Status
Not open for further replies.
padr81 said:
So you think United are pretty much the same as last season? If you do you haven't been watching much of them.
Bookies odds of course are based on money but what you are trying to say is that my opinion on United being clear 2nd favorites is wrong but the bookies and therefor the majority of the people reckon United are clearly stronger and expected to do better than Spurs.

That of course is not a knock on Spurs, your squad cost roughly 1/7th of that of United or City but it is the reality for you guys. You are 3rd favorites and well behind United and City in the pecking order. It's not the end of the world.
Click to expand...

I have neither said nor implied that. You are - for example - 6 points better off so far compared to the same/equivalent fixtures, which by itself suggests an improvement. From the games I've seen you also (mostly) look better on the pitch.

As for being clear favourites for the title ahead of Spurs, check out these historical odds in the run-up to - and during the early part of the 2015-16 season ...

The Sky Bet odds - Prem title race:

* March 18th 2015 (the book opens): United: 6/1; Spurs: 50/1
* August 8th 2015 - Season starts: United: 5/1; Spurs: 100/1
* September 12th 2015 - City in charge: United: 12/1; Spurs: 250/1
* October 6th 2015: United 13/2; Spurs: 100/1

So, 2 years ago on a comparable date to now the bookies had United more than 15 times more likely than Spurs to win the title, but in the end Spurs finished 3rd and United 5th (whilst City, who were 8/11 on to win the title on that Oct. 6th date, finished 4th).

Or take last season: Chelsea went from 20/1 in September to league champions with two games to spare.

As I've said bookies' odds reflect in part the amounts of money placed by punters, so using them to justify a footballing opinion is usually a fool's errand.
 
Paul_Scholes18 said:
I don't agree that one point is that great. Sure it is better than defeats. Although we had a long run unbeaten last season that did see us in 6th place last season. Mourinhos tactic works well in the cups and I really like his approach in those games as not being beaten will get you through. Although playing for 1 point can often get punished in the league.

For Real Madrid vs Barcelona I guess it could would work better since it is basically those 2 teams fighting for it so a draw is not 2 points lost, but actually things have not changed. While with 6 top teams playing for draws against them all will be a lot of points dropped. 1 win and 1 defeat is one point more.

I don't think we should be naive, but I want to see Mourinho having a go at teams a bit more at least in spells like the first 15-25 minutes in difficult away games. If we got a lead then playing defensively is certainly a fine way to defend those points.
Click to expand...

A point at the Bridge is always a great result. Don't get carried away by the City win there. It's going to be an extremely tough match for us no matter what and we always struggled there.
 
acnumber9 said:
He's basically completely changed what a projection means and how they should be applied. Basically he's creating his own model that portrays Tottenham in the best possible light. As he always does.
Click to expand...

I haven't created "my own model". The model concerned is as old as the hills and widely referenced. All I did was cite its existence and what it currently says, but since you don't like what it says you chose to jump down my throat about it.

Nor have I changed "what a projection means" or how it should be applied.

And nor did I say that its projections are my own personal predictions, yet you chose - for aggressive reasons best known to yourself - to conflate the two things as if they were identical.

If you want to cite a different model, or no model at all, fine. Or if you disagree with the premise on which the model I've cited us based, again that's fine. What's not fine is all the accompanying shit you deal out about it.
 
GlastonSpur said:
I haven't created "my own model". The model concerned is as old as the hills and widely referenced. All I did was cite its existence and what it currently says, but since you don't like what it says you chose to jump down my throat about it.

Nor have I changed "what a projection means" or how it should be applied.

And nor did I say that its projections are my own personal predictions, yet you chose - for aggressive reasons best known to yourself - to conflate the two things as if they were identical.

If you want to cite a different model, or no model at all, fine. Or if you disagree with the premise on which the model I've cited us based, again that's fine. What's not fine is all the accompanying shit you deal out about it.
Click to expand...
Glaston vs The Dictionary. There can be only one winner.
 
I am happy with United's points accumulation so far. Sure, City has been on another level amassing points beating Liverpool and Chelsea along the way. And to be fair, if they are going to continue winning games irrespective of the opponents then I will raise my hand up and say they deserve it. However, any drought pointwise from them and we will get the title as I believe we will be conservative versus top sides but smash all the lower teams.

I don't think spurs is good enough this season, they were short in the last few so I'm not sure what has changed for them. If they think they will be above city come May then that is just wishful thinking.
 
Interestingly, both City and United had almost the same start in season 11-12 in terms of points and GD. City won then 12 of the first 13 games but slowed down after November and won the title only because United fecked up.
 
Last edited:
Treble said:
Interestingly, both City and United had almost the same start in season 11-12 in terms of points and GD. City won then 12 of the first 13 games but slowed down after November and won the title only because United fecked up.
Click to expand...
Exactly the same points, and coincidentally we had just opened up a 2 point gap in GW8 because of your 1-1 draw at Anfield. That early run of 11/12 was the best City side I had seen, but this one is running it very close. I think 89 points from either side would win the league again.
 
Both City and you have quite an easy run until you go face to face. Should still be close for that time.
 
Dumbstar said:
Not really, Jose tried for Morata and Griezmann. Even landing Lukaku was great last minute work. A lot for Klopp to learn from City and Utd. But Jose needs to be braver in games. Getting a draw is always two points dropped than one point gained in 99% of cases. Pep has learned that from last season.
Click to expand...

All three of those players were for the same position, striker. I'm not sure if we got Griezmann we would've gotten Lukaku. Fact remains that we did nothing to backup our wide attacking options, and as such they remain weak. Compare that to City - who identified GK and the full backs as the weak positions, and improved them. Our weaknesses by far are the two wide positions. Rashford's good and I hope he makes the step up, but players like Mata, Mikhi and Martial are too inconsistent to really do anything. City, Pool, Chelsea and Spurs all have better wide attacking options than us. Our strength really is in the rest of the pitch, but against top teams you need strong attacking players to create something.
 
marktan said:
All three of those players were for the same position, striker. I'm not sure if we got Griezmann we would've gotten Lukaku. Fact remains that we did nothing to backup our wide attacking options, and as such they remain weak. Compare that to City - who identified GK and the full backs as the weak positions, and improved them. Our weaknesses by far are the two wide positions. Rashford's good and I hope he makes the step up, but players like Mata, Mikhi and Martial are too inconsistent to really do anything. City, Pool, Chelsea and Spurs all have better wide attacking options than us. Our strength really is in the rest of the pitch, but against top teams you need strong attacking players to create something.
Click to expand...

For Martial to thrive, he needs games and experience. He is still not getting that, anyone else writing that (especially the journalists) are not checking the facts. In the league this season, he has played 10, 15, 75, 18, 2, 0, 18 and 64 minutes. That is 25 mins in average pr. game, just about the same as 2+ games in total. He is not playing, hence he is not developing strength and consistency, which leads to being inconsistent. I would absolutely not hold anything against Martial if he decides to put in a transfer request after this season - he could become so much more visible for a more attacking team with another manager. I bet that Rashford will start against Huddersfield and Martial will get 25 minutes tops, where he will probably score a goal and assist another. Martial has 3+2 in the league, a point every 40 mins. Yet, not playing.
 
James Peril said:
For Martial to thrive, he needs games and experience. He is still not getting that, anyone else writing that (especially the journalists) are not checking the facts. In the league this season, he has played 10, 15, 75, 18, 2, 0, 18 and 64 minutes. That is 25 mins in average pr. game, just about the same as 2+ games in total. He is not playing, hence he is not developing strength and consistency, which leads to being inconsistent. I would absolutely not hold anything against Martial if he decides to put in a transfer request after this season - he could become so much more visible for a more attacking team with another manager. I bet that Rashford will start against Huddersfield and Martial will get 25 minutes tops, where he will probably score a goal and assist another. Martial has 3+2 in the league, a point every 40 mins. Yet, not playing.
Click to expand...

There's a reason for that - he was inconsistent last season when he played, and when he's started this season he's been inconsistent again. He's looked good when he's come off the bench for precisely one reason - he's fresh, the oppositions tired, and usually a goal or two down - so there's more space for him to exploit. When he starts, he just doesn't have enough at the moment.
 
GlastonSpur said:
I have neither said nor implied that. You are - for example - 6 points better off so far compared to the same/equivalent fixtures, which by itself suggests an improvement. From the games I've seen you also (mostly) look better on the pitch.

As for being clear favourites for the title ahead of Spurs, check out these historical odds in the run-up to - and during the early part of the 2015-16 season ...

The Sky Bet odds - Prem title race:

* March 18th 2015 (the book opens): United: 6/1; Spurs: 50/1
* August 8th 2015 - Season starts: United: 5/1; Spurs: 100/1
* September 12th 2015 - City in charge: United: 12/1; Spurs: 250/1
* October 6th 2015: United 13/2; Spurs: 100/1

So, 2 years ago on a comparable date to now the bookies had United more than 15 times more likely than Spurs to win the title, but in the end Spurs finished 3rd and United 5th (whilst City, who were 8/11 on to win the title on that Oct. 6th date, finished 4th).

Or take last season: Chelsea went from 20/1 in September to league champions with two games to spare.

As I've said bookies' odds reflect in part the amounts of money placed by punters, so using them to justify a footballing opinion is usually a fool's errand.
Click to expand...

Doesn't matter what you're saying but the gist of it is this... the opinion of thousands shouldn't be trusted but the opinion of one blinkered Spurs fan who finds an offhand comment about United being more likely to come second offensive is more legit? Using the bookies to justify an opinion (which shows clearly thousands agree with me) is much less a fools errand than using an illogical opinion of a blinkered fan.

Please... The difference in who United have signed in those 2 years while not much has changed at Spurs. If you can't wrap your head around or understand why United are more fancied for second than you guys I give up....
 
padr81 said:
Doesn't matter what you're saying but the gist of it is this... the opinion of thousands shouldn't be trusted but the opinion of one blinkered Spurs fan who finds an offhand comment about United being more likely to come second offensive is more legit? Using the bookies to justify an opinion (which shows clearly thousands agree with me) is much less a fools errand than using an illogical opinion of a blinkered fan.

Please... The difference in who United have signed in those 2 years while not much has changed at Spurs. If you can't wrap your head around or understand why United are more fancied for second than you guys I give up....
Click to expand...

The phrase I questioned was "easily 2nd favourites" [to win the title], not simply "more likely" to come 2nd.

Bookies? I've already shown how silly it is to cite their odds as evidence.

You say: "The difference in who United have signed in those 2 years while not much has changed at Spurs". However, at the end of the first of those 2 years Spurs finished massively ahead (effectively 18 points) of United in the league. So now you're essentially banking on the further signings of Lukaku, Matic and Lindelof to bridge the gap.

Moreover, it's not true to say that "not much has changed at Spurs". For starters you appears to equate only new signings with positive change, although the further development of existing players also counts ... players like Ben Davies, Kieran Trippier and Harry Winks for example. Also, we have replaced Walker with Aurier, Janssen with Llorente and Wimmer with Davinson Sanchez, which I view as a net upgrade.

I've been called "blinkered" before - such as last summer when I predicted another top 4 finish for Spurs.
 
GlastonSpur said:
The phrase I questioned was "easily 2nd favourites" [to win the title], not simply "more likely" to come 2nd.

Bookies? I've already shown how silly it is to cite their odds as evidence.

You say: "The difference in who United have signed in those 2 years while not much has changed at Spurs". However, at the end of the first of those 2 years Spurs finished massively ahead (effectively 18 points) of United in the league. So now you're essentially banking on the further signings of Lukaku, Matic and Lindelof to bridge the gap.

Moreover, it's not true to say that "not much has changed at Spurs". For starters you appears to equate only new signings with positive change, although the further development of existing players also counts ... players like Ben Davies, Kieran Trippier and Harry Winks for example. Also, we have replaced Walker with Aurier, Janssen with Llorente and Wimmer with Davinson Sanchez, which I view as a net upgrade.

I've been called "blinkered" before - such as last summer when I predicted another top 4 finish for Spurs.
Click to expand...

Easily because 80% of all professionals involved in the game reckon it will be a City, United 1-2. So does 80% of the world.
Not much has changed because your first XI is very much like for like. Aurier and Walker is pretty much like for like, Sanchez is a good signing and Llorente is much better than Janssen but will hardly feature (and rightly so as Kane is one of the best in Europe.). Essentially your starting XI is the same with Aurier for Walker and Sanchez being an addition at CB. In the same two years, United have added Bailly, Pogba, Matic, Lukaku and have Zlatan returning.

You're still not getting my point about the bookies. It is for every person who thinks Spurs will finish above United there are 4-5 who think United will finish above Spurs. That means they are easily 2nd favorites. 80% or so of the football watching world think this.
You my friend are trying to argue down an opinion I give that I share with hundreds of thousands possibly millions of football fans worldwide while saying your own is more valid because.

Personally if City don't win it, I'd love to see you guys win it and I have far more dislike for United than you guys but my head tells me logically United are clear faves for the title if City fall apart so therefor clear faves for a top 2 position. I mean they've 7 clean sheets in 8 PL games...

What I'm saying is not a dig at Spurs, nor were my comments in the other thread about your success although the were harsh. It's just simply football as myself and a lot of others see it. Of course you are likely to disagree but I still think to win the title you are going to need that £150m window where you bring in an absolute superstar probably in place of Son. Systems and tactics and a lot of good players will only get you so far. You've done brilliantly to get where you are with what you've done. But you really do need that kind of window, can afford it and it could be the catalyst to get you over the line.

You are a far better side than Arsenal for example but again, history books will have Arsenal in the trophies in 3 of the last 4 seasons and won't feature you guys. Why? Because imho of Sanchez. You need to put up the stupid money (and stupid money it will be) for that calibre of player to make the final step and as of yet, you seem reluctant.
 
Raw said:
With Spurs and Chelsea next for us, I fear that City are just gonna run away with it.
Click to expand...
was there ever a doubt? all the late goal fests were just us flattering to deceive
 
Over already this City side just aren’t letting up and we’re 5 points off them already
 
charlenefan said:
Over already this City side just aren’t letting up and we’re 5 points off them already
Click to expand...
City can at least pretend there is a title race going on. I believe this City team is going to break all records possible. Most goals. Most points. Unbeaten season.
 
ayushreddevil9 said:
was there ever a doubt? all the late goal fests were just us flattering to deceive
Click to expand...
Did think we could get close with Mourinho's experience but unfortunately it's looking a lot more likely that it'll be City ahead by 10 points while we piss about in a top 4 battle.
 
People over reacting again... City will hit some bad form sooner or later and this is far from over.
 
City have scored more goals than Palace, Bournemouth, Everton, Swansea, Southampton and WBA combined

Ridiculous
 
Cal? said:
People over reacting again... City will hit some bad form sooner or later and this is far from over.
Click to expand...

I don't think they are overreacting. We're still at least a few outstanding signings away from really challenging. Most of us recognised that as the transfer window was drawing to a close.

City are going to pile up the points and goals against the cannon fodder. And they've already crushed Liverpool and seen off Chelsea too.

I bet the bookies have City at tiny odds for the title now.
 
Cal? said:
People over reacting again... City will hit some bad form sooner or later and this is far from over.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but we need to make sure we're there with them to capitalise when they do. Results like today are only giving them more breathing room when they do.
 
Cal? said:
People over reacting again... City will hit some bad form sooner or later and this is far from over.
Click to expand...
I hate people talking about City hitting a bad patch as if it's an eventuality. And if it does happen, then the points dropped in our last two league games gives them breathing room.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.