The Friedkin Group reaches agreement to buy Everton

[Marius57]

It’s the difference, I allowed for the anomaly of rounding up and rounding down because obviously the numbers aren't exact, as they are secondary and decimalised and it doesn’t take into account the points deduction.

Because it’s the closet comparrison that can be made qualitatively - is it fairer to compare the context of Everton 23/24 to Chelsea or Real Madrid. Which creates the deviation we are debating.

You can’t really do a like for like quantitive comparrison (which is what is being attempted here) with qualitative variables you’d want Jose to be managing I don’t know Leicester this season, with their budget in the summer.

It’s whether the deviation created is based on ability or resources and I don’t think it’s that stark when you start adding in qualitative variable. Surprisingly so.

I can break it down for you. Even 0.8 ppg more is a huge amount difference. Dyche is not on mourinhos level, otherwise he would have had these top jobs.

And while I don’t want Mourinho at our club for various reasons, he would be a big improvement on our current manager.

 

[Neiler]

I can break it down for you. Even 0.8 ppg more is a huge amount difference. Dyche is not on mourinhos level, otherwise he would have had these top jobs.

Your missing the point I’m making on quantitive and qualitative data.

If you add the numbers together and multiply by 38 - then Mourhino is superior. (Quantitive)

If you add the context - say net spend, squad size, available players, club budgets (Qualitive) then the deviation isnt that stark, surprisingly so.

Think of it this way in a two lap race, a Ford Fiesta takes on a F1 Red Bull - The Fiesta finishes a lap behind, has the F1 Red Bull performed well or the Fiesta.

Dyche isn't even a lap behind comparatively.

 

[Lob]

Thought it would be better given he was managing Chelsea and Utd with 100s of million at play. Dyche only .8 ish of a point per match behind!

Be funny to do a comparative net spend and see how much .8 of a point costs.

It is completely pointless looking at the difference between 1.2 ppm and 2.02 ppm when the wins, draws and losses are literally on the same graphic. The answer is simple. Dyches 1.2 ppm is the result of 92 wins, 85 draws and 144 losses and Mourhino's 2.02 ppm is the result of 217 wins, 84 draws and 62 losses. Evading the elephant in the room wont change the fact that Dyches record is abysmal and Mourhinos is very good.

Would be wiser to concentrate on the fact that Mourhino obviously had better budgets and players but then if the Friedkin group are bringing in a new manager, they will also be bringing in better quality players too for that Manager too over a period of time. I cannot imagine a universe where they would expect such a drastic improvement from the current Manager looking at his career record regardless of what funds and players he had access too.

 

[Neiler]

It is completely pointless looking at the difference between 1.2 ppm and 2.02 ppm when the wins, draws and losses are literally on the same graphic. The answer is simple. Dyches 1.2 ppm is the result of 92 wins, 85 draws and 144 losses and Mourhino's 2.02 ppm is the result of 217 wins, 84 draws and 62 losses. Evading the elephant in the room wont change the fact that Dyches record is abysmal and Mourhinos is very good.

Would be wiser to concentrate on the fact that Mourhino obviously had better budgets and players but then if the Friedkin group are bringing in a new manager, they will also be bringing in better quality players too for that Manager too over a period of time. I cannot imagine a universe where they would expect such a drastic improvement from the current Manager looking at his career record regardless of what funds and players he had access too.

100% the deviation isn't stark even with the wins, draws and losses - i mean you are comparing Burnley to Chelsea in the first three years under Abromovich. I think you lads think you have a smoking gun you haven't, in fact conveying the opposite then intended.

What the comparable net spend? Of comparative best 11s? That would be fun.

This is essentially a Quantitively vs Qualitive argument - as im illustrating above.

Another interesting, slant is which takes more skill and competency - getting Burnley into Europe from the Championship or winning the league with Chelsea under a drunken sailor spending Abramovich. Its a curious debate.

Its not so much the data im surprised by, its the deviation.

Anyway im sure no one cares mate - we're all going off topic and none of us are going to agree!

 

[coollino]

AI is back then

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

Yes but he gets those clubs and the money because he is trusted to win, Dyche gets Burnley and us at a low ebb because he isn’t trusted to win. It is a bit like comparing me to Wayne Rooney and saying he played for England, Everton and Manchester United and I didn’t only because he was better at kicking a ball.

It’s a bit different because it ignores the fact that all of the teams Mourinho has managed have a big financial advantage over the teams Dyche has managed. It’s like comparing an F1 driver with an Olympic cyclist. The F1 driver will obviously have a higher average speed but you wouldn’t choose them them to ride a bike over an actual cyclist.

 

[Harryflashman]

It’s a bit different because it ignores the fact that all of the teams Mourinho has managed have a big financial advantage over the teams Dyche has managed. It’s like comparing an F1 driver with an Olympic cyclist. The F1 driver will obviously have a higher average speed but you wouldn’t choose them them to ride a bike over an actual cyclist.

How about when he won the champions league with porto what was his spend like compared to the sides he was competing with then ?

Again I’ll say it I’m not cheerleading for him to get the Everton job but does feel like there is some revisionism going on .

 

[Lob]

100% the deviation isn't stark even with the wins, draws and losses - i mean you are comparing Burnley to Chelsea in the first three years under Abromovich. I think you lads think you have a smoking gun you haven't, in fact conveying the opposite then intended.

What the comparable net spend? Of comparative best 11s? That would be fun.

This is essentially a Quantitively vs Qualitive argument - as im illustrating above.

Another interesting, slant is which takes more skill and competency - getting Burnley into Europe from the Championship or winning the league with Chelsea under a drunken sailor spending Abramovich. Its a curious debate.

Its not so much the data im surprised by, its the deviation.

Anyway im sure no one cares mate - we're all going off topic and none of us are going to agree!

LoL just listen to yourself mate.

100% the difference is stark between wins draws and losses. Dyches is negative and abysmal and Mourhino's is positive and very good regardless of what players they had or net spends. Of course there are differences with net spends, players etc but the difference is still very stark no matter the circumstances.

Anyway like you say, pointless going round in circles.

Come on Friedkin group, get the deal complete already.

 

[Blue peter]

Your missing the point I’m making on quantitive and qualitative data.

If you add the numbers together and multiply by 38 - then Mourhino is superior. (Quantitive)

If you add the context - say net spend, squad size, available players, club budgets (Qualitive) then the deviation isnt that stark, surprisingly so.

Think of it this way in a two lap race, a Ford Fiesta takes on a F1 Red Bull - The Fiesta finishes a lap behind, has the F1 Red Bull performed well or the Fiesta.

Dyche isn't even a lap behind comparatively.

It is a weird one with Dyche. He’s clearly an intelligent and articulate guy in his interviews and press conferences (despite the business style wording he uses) yet despite the environmental challenges (and there were environmental challenges), he had a decent season points wide in the final reckoning at 48 points.

During that same period he also had that horrid run and the fact he seems to be ideologically pre disposed to a certain profile of football (could be due to budgetary constraints) and at times appears to be unremovable from his in game managerial philosophy. Subs late in games, not very proactive.

In terms of a like for like performance vs Mourinho yes always start with the qualitative data, the hard, cold facts and then there has to be that recontextualisation of performance by discussing those environmental factors as you say. The difficulty despite that is twofold really. Firstly we don’t know all of the information, only public domain information and secondly, no one really knows what the differential in points should be even with those, so you never really know if Dyche’s performance on a pound for pound performance was comparable or even favourable.

It’s like a ring magazine’s no 1 fighter in boxing….comparing different weight classes really is never easy.

 

[st.domingo]

Pep is GOAT on a mere 2.36.

Interestingly, Mancini > Mourinho

The 15 managers with the best points-per-game record in Premier League history - Ten Hag 10th

🇦🇷 15. Mauricio Pochettino 🇮🇹 10. Carlo Ancelotti 🇵🇹 6. Jose Mourinho The most successful manager in Premier League history is _____ 🤔

www.givemesport.com

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

if you compared Pellegrini’s points average at City to Dyche’s then the difference would also be stark but no one would want Pellegrini. A better comparison would be Mourinho’s average points at Spurs v Dyche at Everton.

 

[Neiler]

LoL just listen to yourself mate.

100% the difference is stark between wins draws and losses. Dyches is negative and abysmal and Mourhino's is positive and very good regardless of what players they had or net spends. Of course there are differences with net spends, players etc but the difference is still very stark no matter the circumstances.

Anyway like you say, pointless going round in circles.

Come on Friedkin group, get the deal complete already.

Ive posted my reasoning mate and happy to stand over it and all ive said as you can see! None of us will agree, but maybe food for thought.

Id suggest Mourhino has a tendency to be a bit negative himself. Or maybe more apt in both cases pragmatic.

Overall its prob one for the Dyche thread, though i generally stay away from there when results are good, far more fun when things are going bad.

Good we can all chat about this stuff though!

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

I can break it down for you. Even 0.8 ppg more is a huge amount difference. Dyche is not on mourinhos level, otherwise he would have had these top jobs.

And while I don’t want Mourinho at our club for various reasons, he would be a big improvement on our current manager.

He wouldn’t, he would be absolutely toxic.

 

[Eggs]

….i remember an interview with Ray Wilkins (RiP) many years ago when after working with Mourinho said ‘there’s two Ps when it comes to transfers, Proven and Potential and Mourinho loves proven’. I think he’s a very pragmatic manager, he sets his team up to get something, not necessarilly with exciting football.

I just don’t think he’ll fit what TFG have in mind for us.

 

[Kevsleftpeg]

Yes, that was amazing achievement but it was a very long time ago. Ranieri also won the EPL with Leicester which was even more impressive. But Ranieri subsequently bombed. Mourinho has had plenty of opportunities since being Utd manager and the results have been similar everywhere. Boring football, an unhappy and chaotic club and the occasional minor trophy. I don’t he is worth the hassle.