But you have to admit, there is a very strong relationship.  Don't worry
about the anomolies.  They aren't important.

Bear in mind also that wages are not a perfect analogue for player quality,
which is the real determinant of league position.  A great players can join
a club on 30k a week but he is really worth 50k a week.  This is especially
true for youth players where value and negotiating position are weaker.

I know it's a hard thing to trust, but stats can genuinely identify the
amount of varaibility that is explained by a factor.  You might not agree
that managers account for about 3% of final position but you're surely
changing your mind about the importance of a manager?

On 20 December 2011 16:14, Paul Crowe <pcr...@contechengineering.com> wrote:

>  Dear Steve,****
>
> ** **
>
> I found these figures on the web from Deloitte’s annual football report
> for season 2009 to 2010, the season before your figures. Results as follows:
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> Team..........League Rank...Wage Rank...Difference
> Burnley.........     .18..............19................1
> Fulham................12...............11.......... ......-1
> Stoke................11...............14.......... ......3
> Spurs..................5................7......... .......2
> Man Utd..............2................3............... ..1
> Wolves..............18...............15........... .....3
> Blackpool...........19...............20........... .....1
> Arsenal...............3.................5......... .......2
> Everton..............8.................8.......... ......0
> Wigan...............16...............15........... .....-1
> Hull City..........19...............16............ ....-3
> Bolton...............13...............14.......... ......1
> Chelsea..............1.................1.......... .....0
> Birmingham.........17...............9............ ..8
> Man City.............5.................2.............. .-3
> Liverpool.............6.................4......... ......-2
> Sunderland.........10................8............ ....-2
> Aston villa...........9.................6...............-3
> Blackburn...........15...............12........... ....-3
> West Ham..........17................10...............-7****
>
> Compared to your results for last season 2010 to 2011:****
>
> ** **
>
> Team..........League Rank...Wage Rank...Difference
> West Brom..........11..............19................8
> Fulham................8...............11.......... ......3
> Stoke................13...............15.......... ......2
> Spurs..................5................7......... .......2
> Man Utd..............1................3............... ..2
> Wolves..............17...............18........... .....1
> Blackpool...........19...............20........... .....1
> Arsenal...............4.................5......... .......1
> Everton..............7.................8.......... ......1
> Wigan...............16...............16........... .....0
> Newcastle..........12...............12............ ....0
> Bolton...............14...............14.......... ......0
> Chelsea..............2.................1.......... .....-1
> Birmingham.........18...............17............ ..-1
> Man City.............3.................2.............. .-1
> Liverpool.............6.................4......... ......-2
> Sunderland.........10................8............ ....-2
> Aston villa...........9.................6...............-3
> Blackburn...........15...............12........... ....-3
> West Ham..........20................8...............-12****
>
> ** **
>
> Ok, pretty similar results. The 2 x anomaly’s for 2009 to 2010 being
> Birmingham and West Ham. Interesting that West Ham went up 2 x places in
> terms of the wage table for last season compared to the previous year but
> ended up finishing bottom and were relegated.****
>
> Pity Deloitte do not publish their reports. Anybody have the figures for
> the season 2008 to 2009? ****
>
> Still not convinced Manager’s have no effect whatsoever and that 90% of
> team performance is directly attributed to wage bill spend. ****
>
> Regards****
>
> Paul.****
>
>  ****
>
> ** **
>
> Paul Crowe****
>
> Sales Manager - Asia Pacific****
>
>  ****
>
> ConTech (Sydney Office)****
>
>  ****
>
> PO Box 3517****
>
> Rhodes Waterside****
>
> Rhodes NSW  2138****
>
> Tel: 02 97396636  Fax: 02 97396542****
>
> Mob: 0406009562****
>
> Email: pcr...@contechengineering.com****
>
> Website: www.contechengineering.com****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* nswolves@googlegroups.com [mailto:nswolves@googlegroups.com] *On
> Behalf Of *Steven Millward
> *Sent:* Tuesday, 20 December 2011 2:36 PM
> *To:* nswolves
> *Subject:* [NSWolves] Fwd: Prem league wages****
>
> ** **
>
> Here's the wages data that Paul Crowe asked for,  It's more or less the
> same as the data I have already shared.****
>
>  ****
>
> West Ham is an outlier and linear regression is not robust so you get a
> stronger r-squared when you take it out.  God knows what happened to them
> last season****
>
> --
> Boo! Thick Mick Out.****
>
> --
> Boo! Thick Mick Out.
>

-- 
Boo! Thick Mick Out.

Reply via email to