Jump to content

How many points for 2nd place this season


Thedelldays
 Share

Recommended Posts

wadda you reckon..

 

no one seems to be running away with it this season...unlike most...

teams capable of beating and losing to anyone...even after a very poor 8 games or so, we are only 1 point from the top.

the teams around us have to play each other more so......so mean more points guaranteed to be dropped all round..

 

IMO...I reckon 84 may be enough for 2nd place...........which is all I care about

 

god know what the trend has been in the last few years for 2nd though

 

edit...norwich went up in 2nd on 84 points....and we are only 1 win away at home to matching them...they lost 4 at home all season and won 13....they did win 10 away mind.....so we need another couple of away wins and look to maximise our home games i guess

Edited by Thedelldays
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I figured 86 would be all good.

 

Based that on another 19 at home and just 12 away before last night's game.

 

7 games at home with either Reading or Skate FC taking a couple of points off of us.

 

Away, wins at Watford,Palace and either Millwall or Peterborough would leaves us needing just a couple of draws from the other as we got a point at West Ham.

 

Any more than that would be a bonus and we might even talk about being Champions but I'm none to worried about that.

If we finish above 3rd on just goal difference or goals scored that's OK by me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of teams are starting to perform now. Obviously no guarantee they will keep it up but I reckon we'll need at least 90 to be sure of automatics.

 

That will be hard to get then although I still doubt that it will be necessary because they all still have to play West Ham.

That's our great advantage we have finished with virtually all of the Top 2 candidates other than Reading and we have them at home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A number of teams are starting to perform now. Obviously no guarantee they will keep it up but I reckon we'll need at least 90 to be sure of automatics.

no way will it be 90 points.....that means we would have to win every single game and allow for 2 losses......no chance..not with all the teams around us playing each other more than we play them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who the hell is looking for the lads finishing 2nd? Why second best when we can easily go for being Champions. Of course, let everyone think we're after 2nd place and we'll end up in the playoffs. What is this mentality nowadays of going for 2nd best, aiming low and ending up with nothing. The players, all of them need to know we don't settle for anything but the top spot, the 3points in every game left to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who the hell is looking for the lads finishing 2nd? Why second best when we can easily go for being Champions. Of course, let everyone think we're after 2nd place and we'll end up in the playoffs. What is this mentality nowadays of going for 2nd best, aiming low and ending up with nothing. The players, all of them need to know we don't settle for anything but the top spot, the 3points in every game left to play.

I don't for one think that talking about 2nd place on a message board translate to the players/manager/club aiming for 2nd....

 

I for one, would be utterly buzzing if we finish 2nd..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who the hell is looking for the lads finishing 2nd? Why second best when we can easily go for being Champions. Of course, let everyone think we're after 2nd place and we'll end up in the playoffs. What is this mentality nowadays of going for 2nd best, aiming low and ending up with nothing. The players, all of them need to know we don't settle for anything but the top spot, the 3points in every game left to play.

 

1st would be great, but 2nd would also be great. Both have the same prize at the end of it.

 

Norwich finished 2nd last year, and QPR finished top. Look at them this year in the premiership.

 

Finishing top means zilch, IMO, just get up by whatever means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will be hard to get then although I still doubt that it will be necessary because they all still have to play West Ham.

That's our great advantage we have finished with virtually all of the Top 2 candidates other than Reading and we have them at home.

 

Blackpool away?

Hull City away?

Middlesborough away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will need:

 

1 more point than the team that finishes third, or the same points and one better goal difference. We shouldn't set a target as there is no guarantee that any points target will give us promotion, except one - if we win every game between now and May, we'll go up. Anything else is just conjecture.

 

I remember my old boss, who supports West Ham, complaining about how when they were relegated in 2003 they went down with 42 points, a total that would have kept them up in every other year since the dawn of time (yawn). However when I pointed out to him that they were still the 3rd worst team in the division, he had no answer. We don't need a particular points target, we just need to be the best or second-best team at accumulating points. - If we finish 2nd behind the 'Ammers, we can still claim to be the best football team, as they no longer play football, they play hoofball, with a side order of fouling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had a quick look on Soccerbase and it suggests that in the last 10 years > 80 points has been good enough to secure 2nd spot as 3rd placed teams were under this figure. In the remaining years it has been 85, 86 and 87 required but that high a figure has not been needed for the last 4 seasons.

 

Last four seasons have been a requirement of 81, 80, 81 and 76 to beat 2nd place. The numbers suggest that a figure in the region of 81+ would be quite difficult to overhaul assuming the trend continues this year as with prior years (I have no reason to believe it won't).

 

My punt is therefore a requirement of 83 points which factors in a bit of contingency over previous seasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1st would be great, but 2nd would also be great. Both have the same prize at the end of it.

 

Norwich finished 2nd last year, and QPR finished top. Look at them this year in the premiership.

 

Finishing top means zilch, IMO, just get up by whatever means.

Would be nice to win the league for once though (probs the first time in living memory of nearly all posters).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had a quick look on Soccerbase and it suggests that in the last 10 years > 80 points has been good enough to secure 2nd spot as 3rd placed teams were under this figure. In the remaining years it has been 85, 86 and 87 required but that high a figure has not been needed for the last 4 seasons.

 

Last four seasons have been a requirement of 81, 80, 81 and 76 to beat 2nd place. The numbers suggest that a figure in the region of 81+ would be quite difficult to overhaul assuming the trend continues this year as with prior years (I have no reason to believe it won't).

 

My punt is therefore a requirement of 83 points which factors in a bit of contingency over previous seasons.

 

 

This is such an idiotic way of looking at things, and it drives me mad every time someone does it.

 

To finish second in any given season you have to do better than the team below you, this is true.

 

But to then extrapolate that and say we only need to aim to acheive fractionally better than the historical third placed team to finish second is simple nonsense.

 

In 2009/10 for example, 80 points would have us finish above Forest in third. Fine. But WBA, who finished second, got ninety one points. Last year, 80 points and great GD would see us above Swansea in third, but Norwich got eighty four points. 2009, it was eighty-four for second. 2008 in a very low points season it was actually eighty. Well done. In 2007 it was eighty-six. In 2006 it was ninety. In 2005 it was eighty-seven. In 2004 it was eighty-six and in 2003 it was ninety-two.

 

That's the kind of points totals the teams in second get.

 

If we don't get that points total, someone else will. The rest of the league won't stop because we've passed the average points total for third.

Please, please, please can people stop posting this moronic nonsense ignoring all historical second place teams and pitching everything against historical third place teams.

Don't say in the last ten years "eighty points has been good enough to secure second spot", because apart from one season it hasn't. It blatantly, patently, clearly, hasn't been enough points.

 

In a marathon, if you overtake the man in third, you finish....third.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That will be hard to get then although I still doubt that it will be necessary because they all still have to play West Ham.

That's our great advantage we have finished with virtually all of the Top 2 candidates other than Reading and we have them at home.

 

Actually scrub that, I've just looked at the table again. 90 would be a real stretch for any of the team behind us given the number of games left .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is such an idiotic way of looking at things, and it drives me mad every time someone does it.

 

To finish second in any given season you have to do better than the team below you, this is true.

 

But to then extrapolate that and say we only need to aim to acheive fractionally better than the historical third placed team to finish second is simple nonsense.

 

In 2009/10 for example, 80 points would have us finish above Forest in third. Fine. But WBA, who finished second, got ninety one points. Last year, 80 points and great GD would see us above Swansea in third, but Norwich got eighty four points. 2009, it was eighty-four for second. 2008 in a very low points season it was actually eighty. Well done. In 2007 it was eighty-six. In 2006 it was ninety. In 2005 it was eighty-seven. In 2004 it was eighty-six and in 2003 it was ninety-two.

 

That's the kind of points totals the teams in second get.

 

If we don't get that points total, someone else will. The rest of the league won't stop because we've passed the average points total for third.

Please, please, please can people stop posting this moronic nonsense ignoring all historical second place teams and pitching everything against historical third place teams.

Don't say in the last ten years "eighty points has been good enough to secure second spot", because apart from one season it hasn't. It blatantly, patently, clearly, hasn't been enough points.

 

In a marathon, if you overtake the man in third, you finish....third.

 

The original question was asking for an OPINION around how many points posters think we MIGHT need to go up automatically. Now the correct answer is of course more than the 3rd placed team as that will ensure second place however that is an easy answer that requires no justification or thought whatsoever. What I have attempted to do using logic and statistical evidence is come up with an estimate of what I think we might need to gain in terms of points to beat the other contenders for automatic promotion.

 

At no stage did I ever say that we would DEFINITELY go up if we got a certain points total, as being an individual that has intelligence and vast experience around the subject of numbers I also understand that it is POSSIBLE that 2 other teams may gain more points than us and thus we would end up in the play-offs. What I have provided is my best guess, backed by some logic and evidence of previous trends, which is accepted practice in most areas of any business where the final outcome or result is determined by a number.

 

The reason historical third placed teams is used is because that is in fact the number a team has to BEAT to gain a promotion from this division. To go up you only have to BEAT third place and 81 would have been enough in the last 4 years and in my opinion the reason this figure is lower is simply becuase the division is now more competitive than it ever was. Therefore my logic for suggesting the number I did as an OPINION is based on recent trends and my own feeling that the division remains as competitive as the last four seasons, maybe even more so.

 

Whether you like or accept that logic is up to you but please don't label the post as moronic, nonsense, idiotic to coin just three terms simply because you don't agree. You are more than welcome to read and move on if you have nothing constructive to say. What you have written above makes absolutely no sense at all and just because you highlight some things in bold really does not cut much ice. To put you straight, if you pass a man in third before the finish line you finish second. Happy to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aim has always been two points per game hasn't it? I reckon 92 points would definitely do it. I'm not saying that's what we'd probably need, who knows what the minimum could be.

 

That was the thought at the start of the season, certainly. But nobody is achieving that (West Ham included).

 

So, by my maths, Cardiff and Brum are achieving the best points per game ratio of the chasing pack, currently standing at 8 points behind the 2 points per game curve.

 

If they hold that ratio, then they will end up on 84 points. But they have both dropped 8 points against this metric thus far, so I dont think it is unreasonable for both of them to drop some more (against the 2 points per game ratio).

 

So, I reckon third place will get 82 points.

 

We need 83 or a better goal difference.

 

27 points from 15 games. 8 wins, 3 draws, 4 defeats, or 9 wins, 6 defeats...

 

not easy, but certainly doable

Edited by ooh it's a corner
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original question was asking for an OPINION around how many points posters think we MIGHT need to go up automatically. Now the correct answer is of course more than the 3rd placed team as that will ensure second place however that is an easy answer that requires no justification or thought whatsoever. What I have attempted to do using logic and statistical evidence is come up with an estimate of what I think we might need to gain in terms of points to beat the other contenders for automatic promotion.

 

At no stage did I ever say that we would DEFINITELY go up if we got a certain points total, as being an individual that has intelligence and vast experience around the subject of numbers I also understand that it is POSSIBLE that 2 other teams may gain more points than us and thus we would end up in the play-offs. What I have provided is my best guess, backed by some logic and evidence of previous trends, which is accepted practice in most areas of any business where the final outcome or result is determined by a number.

 

The reason historical third placed teams is used is because that is in fact the number a team has to BEAT to gain a promotion from this division. To go up you only have to BEAT third place and 81 would have been enough in the last 4 years and in my opinion the reason this figure is lower is simply becuase the division is now more competitive than it ever was. Therefore my logic for suggesting the number I did as an OPINION is based on recent trends and my own feeling that the division remains as competitive as the last four seasons, maybe even more so.

 

You have looked at previous trends, but you have looked at previous trends for teams finishing third. Which would be relevant if we wanted to finish third.

 

But we don't. We want to finish second*. Have a look at teams that typically finish second place, see what they get, and then aim for that.

 

Aiming to get a slightly better goal difference than a team that typically finish third will see you more than likely finish third.

 

That 81 points would be enough to finish second is not an "opinion", it's you attempting to make a statement of fact and it is embarrassingly wrong. If it is your "best guess" then it is woeful.

 

81 points would not be enough to finish second last season because Norwich got 84 points. 84 points is more points than 81 points. This is not an opinion.

 

The year before 81 would have not been enough because WBA got 91 points. 91 points is more points than 81 points. This is not an opinion.

 

The year before 81 would not have been enough because the team in second got 84 points. 84 points is more points than 81 points. This is not an opinion.

 

There was one season that it was 80 but that is an exception not the rule, and in your dopey world you'd be saying 76 would have been "enough".

 

The year before that 86, before that 90 and before that 87, 86 and then 92. All of those points are all more points than 81 points. This is not an opinion.

 

How precisely, in the face of this clear statistical evidence, and with all your breathtaking knowledge of numbers, is 81 points "enough" in those seasons.

 

The aim is to get more points than the points the other teams get. "Enough" in this situation, would usually mean more. More points I mean.

 

Whether you like or accept that logic is up to you but please don't label the post as moronic, nonsense, idiotic to coin just three terms simply because you don't agree. . What you have written above makes absolutely no sense at all and ....... being an individual that has intelligence and vast experience around the subject of numbers I also understand...to put you straight, if you pass a man in third before the finish line you finish second. Happy to help.

 

Thanks for proving my original impression. Jolly well done on your intelligence and vast experience around the subject of numbers.

Edited by CB Fry
*personally, I want to finish first.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would love to finish 1st too but that was not the OP question. In seven out of ten seasons a team gaining 81 points would beat third and finish second. As it happened teams finishing second ended up with a couple more points than 3rd but it wasn't necessary to do so therefore it is perfectly credible that 83 points might get us up. It's an opinion, obviously not one you agree with so we have to agree to disagree. It's a shame you come across as a pedantic knob CB Fry. I'm guessing you do football analysis for a living ...... I bow to your superior judgement and won't bother posting in future as it's jerks like you that think you know everything but know **** all that make this site worse and worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The original question was asking for an OPINION around how many points posters think we MIGHT need to go up automatically. Now the correct answer is of course more than the 3rd placed team as that will ensure second place however that is an easy answer that requires no justification or thought whatsoever. What I have attempted to do using logic and statistical evidence is come up with an estimate of what I think we might need to gain in terms of points to beat the other contenders for automatic promotion.

 

At no stage did I ever say that we would DEFINITELY go up if we got a certain points total, as being an individual that has intelligence and vast experience around the subject of numbers I also understand that it is POSSIBLE that 2 other teams may gain more points than us and thus we would end up in the play-offs. What I have provided is my best guess, backed by some logic and evidence of previous trends, which is accepted practice in most areas of any business where the final outcome or result is determined by a number.

 

The reason historical third placed teams is used is because that is in fact the number a team has to BEAT to gain a promotion from this division. To go up you only have to BEAT third place and 81 would have been enough in the last 4 years and in my opinion the reason this figure is lower is simply becuase the division is now more competitive than it ever was. Therefore my logic for suggesting the number I did as an OPINION is based on recent trends and my own feeling that the division remains as competitive as the last four seasons, maybe even more so.

 

Whether you like or accept that logic is up to you but please don't label the post as moronic, nonsense, idiotic to coin just three terms simply because you don't agree. You are more than welcome to read and move on if you have nothing constructive to say. What you have written above makes absolutely no sense at all and just because you highlight some things in bold really does not cut much ice. To put you straight, if you pass a man in third before the finish line you finish second. Happy to help.

 

Shame about the last bit because you'd nailed his lack of logic up until then. I'm not sure whether he's deliberately being a "knob" or just thick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I would love to finish 1st too but that was not the OP question. In seven out of ten seasons a team gaining 81 points would beat third and finish second. As it happened teams finishing second ended up with a couple more points than 3rd but it wasn't necessary to do so therefore it is perfectly credible that 83 points might get us up. It's an opinion, obviously not one you agree with so we have to agree to disagree. It's a shame you come across as a pedantic knob CB Fry. I'm guessing you do football analysis for a living ...... I bow to your superior judgement and won't bother posting in future as it's jerks like you that think you know everything but know **** all that make this site worse and worse.

 

 

If all else fails wheel out the "this forum is going to the dogs" routine. Thanks for bowing to my superior judgement because in this case it clearly is. When fighting for league positions there is no such thing as "unneccessary" points. If Saints get to 81 with three games to go I for one would want them to keep trying to get points and not just give up because we may have got "enough" on your system.

 

Shame about the last bit because you'd nailed his lack of logic up until then. I'm not sure whether he's deliberately being a "knob" or just thick?

 

Team in first 95points. Team in second 92points (or 84, or 86, or 90). Team in third 80 points. Extrapolating that out to say 81 is "enough to finish second" is not logic, and clearly I am not the one who is "just thick". It's only been enough to finish second once in the last decade. Not logic. Facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...