Do we rotate more than other teams? I've found out so you don't have to

[DuncanRG]

Like most of you, I'm getting a bit tired of the rotation debate going, ironically, in circles. The key question is whether it's necessary to change players over to cope with three games in a week. Some have raised the top clubs' lack of rotation as evidence that it's not. I wasn't sure if that was actually the case so, anorak I am, I thought I'd check it out in detail.

 

I had intended to do all the clubs in Europe this year but couldn't be bothered when I got to the last two, so if anyone feels like doing City or Spurs, please be my guest. Hope some of you will find it useful.

 

Average changes in European weeks

Man Utd - 6.6

Saints - 6

Arsenal - 4

Leicester - 2.3

 

(edited to avoid long read/looking like too much of a geek...)

Edited 9 January, 2017 by DuncanRG

[DuncanRG]

About 30 seconds after posting this, it's occurred to me that it would have been more useful to look at smaller clubs playing in the Europa League in the past. Oh well.

[Patrick Bateman]

jesus christ.

[Turkish]

Some interesting observations Duncan, may I ask if you have a girlfriend?

[DuncanRG]

Some interesting observations Duncan, may I ask if you have a girlfriend?

 

She goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her

[Saint86]

Like most of you, I'm getting a bit tired of the rotation debate going, ironically, in circles. The key question is whether it's necessary to change players over to cope with three games in a week. Some have raised the top clubs' lack of rotation as evidence that it's not. I wasn't sure if that was actually the case so, anorak I am, I thought I'd check it out in detail.

 

I had intended to do all the clubs in Europe this year but couldn't be bothered when I got to the last two, so if anyone feels like doing City or Spurs, please be my guest. Hope some of you will find it useful.

 

Average changes in European weeks

Man Utd - 6.6

Saints - 6

Arsenal - 4

Leicester - 2.3

 

(edited to avoid long read/looking like too much of a geek...)

 

Surely a better comparison of rotation would be number of players used as a league table of every club... Now if you wouldn't mind doing one of those for us

[Morse]

She goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her

 

It's often said by ex-pros that if the team is winning nobody minds playing 3 times a week. TO my mind the advantage he has gained by having fresher players is out-weighed by having an unsettled team.

[shurlock]

A silly thread which misspecifies the problem. It's not that we rotate just after European games; its that we've been rotating from game to game. For instance, how many sides chopped and changed over the Xmas period as much as us?

[Deano6]

Isn't the problem that the replacement players aren't up to the same standard as the first choice starters? It's not like we're Chelsea with a squad of 25 superstars, so we're bound to be weakened.

 

Mind you even the first choicers aren't up to much these days either.

[Wade Garrett]

Like most of you, I'm getting a bit tired of the rotation debate going, ironically, in circles. The key question is whether it's necessary to change players over to cope with three games in a week. Some have raised the top clubs' lack of rotation as evidence that it's not. I wasn't sure if that was actually the case so, anorak I am, I thought I'd check it out in detail.

 

I had intended to do all the clubs in Europe this year but couldn't be bothered when I got to the last two, so if anyone feels like doing City or Spurs, please be my guest. Hope some of you will find it useful.

 

Average changes in European weeks

Man Utd - 6.6

Saints - 6

Arsenal - 4

Leicester - 2.3

 

(edited to avoid long read/looking like too much of a geek...)

 

But we've been rotating more since going out of Europe.

[doddisalegend]

Isn't the problem that the replacement players aren't up to the same standard as the first choice starters? It's not like we're Chelsea with a squad of 25 superstars, so we're bound to be weakened.

 

Mind you even the first choicers aren't up to much these days either.

 

 

Not really bar a few of our players (VVD, Romeu, Bertrand and Forster) their isn't much difference ability wise with the rest of the squad they are all capable of playing decently. Tadic or Boufal, Long or Jrod, Fonte or Yoshida and all the CM are much of a muchness who you can argue cases for inclusion or exclusion. We don't have 11 stand out first teamers.

[Monk]

About 30 seconds after posting this, it's occurred to me that it would have been more useful to look at smaller clubs playing in the Europa League in the past. Oh well.

 

Perhaps the year Fulham made the final would've been a worthwhile look.

[Whitey Grandad]

 

It's often said by ex-pros that if the team is winning nobody minds playing 3 times a week. TO my mind the advantage he has gained by having fresher players is out-weighed by having an unsettled team.

 

I agree.

[Whitey Grandad]

Isn't the problem that the replacement players aren't up to the same standard as the first choice starters? It's not like we're Chelsea with a squad of 25 superstars, so we're bound to be weakened.

 

Mind you even the first choicers aren't up to much these days either.

 

It was ever thus so. I remember a Danny Baker phone in many decades ago when Wimbledon (?) were fined for putting out a team of reserves in a cup game. The caller pointed out that when Manchester United do it they're sending out a reserve team full of internationals and they never got fined for it.

[Noodles34]

She goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her

 

classic:lol: