[Albion] Is FH really performing that badly?

[Balders]

Firstly, forgive the long post - trust me there is some interesting stuff in it!

Looking purely from a data perspective and not from what different eyes are seeing (lets face it, it's a results driven business over a season, rather than what's currently pretty to the naked eye!) when comparing the data between RDZ and FH (and obviously a bit of Potter in the 2022-23 season) the data is quite telling.

A lot has been made of our defense under FH, so looking at average goals conceded over the last 3 seasons, it's not quite as bad as the short term view of the last "x" matches, although some additional data may explain that (injuries, having no fit RBs and only 2 fit or available CBs for a few games and one of them is gash apparently)

Average Goals Conceded per game:
2022-23 = 1.39 (38 games, Potter/RDZ)
2023-24 = 1.63 (38 games, RDZ)
2024-25 = 1.61 (33 games, FH)

If we split the goals conceded between the first 19 games and the last 19 games or 14 games for this season over the last 2 seasons:

2023-24 games 1-19 = 1.74 (RDZ)
2024-25 games 1-19 = 1.47 (FH)
2023-24 games 20-38 = 1.50 (RDZ)
2023-25 games 20-33 = 1.79 (FH)

So the first half of last season our defense was performing worse than the first half of the season under FH - this has flip flopped - ironically we conceded less goals in the second half of last season, but couldn't score for love nor money (we were averaging 2 goals a game for the first half of the season and 1 goal per game for the last half!) Obviously our defense has performed worse in the second half of this season, possibly down to injuries and available personnel, but it's not performing any worse than the first half of last season under RDZ?

A lot has been made of Lewis Dunk's contribution, particularly recently. Also a lot has been made initially when Igor was dropped to accommodate a fit again Lewis and more recently, the injury to Adam Webster, which saw Lewis back in the side. This is not a dig at Lewis, he's a legend of the club, but these stats are alarming - maybe he just doesn't fit into FH's system:

Lewis has played 21 games out of 33 this season - in those games, we have conceded an average of 2.08 goals per game and picked up an average of 1.10 points per game.
In the 12 games where Lewis was absent, we have conceded an average of 1 goal per game and picked up an average of 1.95 points per game.

For balance these are the games that Lewis missed, so there can be no accusations that they were all easier games (are games against the bottom 3 easier for us anyway!)

Wolves (H)

Liverpool (A)

Man City (H)

Bournemouth (A)

Southampton (H)

Arsenal (H)

Ipswich (A)

Chelsea (H)

Southampton (A)

Bournemouth (H)

Fulham (H)

Man City (A)

Maybe FH's defensive system does work, he adapted after Chelsea, but is what the naked eye is currently seeing a consequence of his system or the players currently available - it's clear in the short term, he needs to adapt again......

Just for the hell of it, if you change our Forest drubbing from a 7-0 loss to a 2-0 loss, our average goals conceded per game would be 1.45 which is close to the number of our 2022-23 season where we made Europe!

 

[cjd]

error

 

[Easy 10]

We currently stand 4 points better off than we did at this point last season.

 

[cjd]

Firstly, forgive the long post - trust me there is some interesting stuff in it!

Looking purely from a data perspective and not from what different eyes are seeing (lets face it, it's a results driven business over a season, rather than what's currently pretty to the naked eye!) when comparing the data between RDZ and FH (and obviously a bit of Potter in the 2022-23 season) the data is quite telling.

A lot has been made of our defense under FH, so looking at average goals conceded over the last 3 seasons, it's not quite as bad as the short term view of the last "x" matches, although some additional data may explain that (injuries, having no fit RBs and only 2 fit or available CBs for a few games and one of them is gash apparently)

Average Goals Conceded per game:
2022-23 = 1.39 (38 games, Potter/RDZ)
2023-24 = 1.63 (38 games, RDZ)
2024-25 = 1.61 (33 games, FH)

If we split the goals conceded between the first 19 games and the last 19 games or 14 games for this season over the last 2 seasons:

2023-24 games 1-19 = 1.74 (RDZ)
2024-25 games 1-19 = 1.47 (FH)
2023-24 games 20-38 = 1.50 (RDZ)
2023-25 games 20-33 = 1.79 (FH)

So the first half of last season our defense was performing worse than the first half of the season under FH - this has flip flopped - ironically we conceded less goals in the second half of last season, but couldn't score for love nor money (we were averaging 2 goals a game for the first half of the season and 1 goal per game for the last half!) Obviously our defense has performed worse in the second half of this season, possibly down to injuries and available personnel, but it's not performing any worse than the first half of last season under RDZ?

A lot has been made of Lewis Dunk's contribution, particularly recently. Also a lot has been made initially when Igor was dropped to accommodate a fit again Lewis and more recently, the injury to Adam Webster, which saw Lewis back in the side. This is not a dig at Lewis, he's a legend of the club, but these stats are alarming - maybe he just doesn't fit into FH's system:

Lewis has played 21 games out of 33 this season - in those games, we have conceded an average of 2.08 goals per game and picked up an average of 1.10 points per game.
In the 12 games where Lewis was absent, we have conceded an average of 1 goal per game and picked up an average of 1.95 points per game.

For balance these are the games that Lewis missed, so there can be no accusations that they were all easier games (are games against the bottom 3 easier for us anyway!)

Wolves (H)

Liverpool (A)

Man City (H)

Bournemouth (A)

Southampton (H)

Arsenal (H)

Ipswich (A)

Chelsea (H)

Southampton (A)

Bournemouth (H)

Fulham (H)

Man City (A)

Maybe FH's defensive system does work, he adapted after Chelsea, but is what the naked eye is currently seeing a consequence of his system or the players currently available - it's clear in the short term, he needs to adapt again......

Just for the hell of it, if you change our Forest drubbing from a 7-0 loss to a 2-0 loss, our average goals conceded per game would be 1.45 which is close to the number of our 2022-23 season where we made Europe!

Whilst I enjoy all these statistics being reeled out to support whatever side of the fence people sit on, it cannot be ignored that this season a significant amount of funds have been spent to upgrade the level of players in the club, compared to previous seasons.

That fact, along with what I see as rather insipid inspiration from our coach is my major concern for the near future.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

I think the easy answer to your question is 'no'.

However, a combination of expectation from progress in previous seasons and the £200m-worth of talent that was SPAFFED over the summer, a good start to the season, up and down patches of form during the season and question marks from some fans about the style and other decisions means that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that it's 'yes'.

Taking a step back, I think it would be mad to get rid of a manager after such a relatively short amount of time and in a season where, if the team finishes in the top 10, one of the club's main ambitions has been achieved. If it all goes to shit and we are LANGUISHING at the bottom of the table and have just been thrashed by an aggregate 10-2 by Leeds and Palace, then maybe it's a different conversation, but I'm firmly in the FAB CAB right now.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

We currently stand 4 points better off than we did at this point last season.

We're 10th so one place up from last year. and GD was -2 whereas we are at zero.

 

[Balders]

Whilst I enjoy all these statistics being reeled out to support whatever side of the fence people sit on, it cannot be ignored that this season a significant amount of funds have been spent to upgrade the level of players in the club, compared to previous seasons.

That fact, along with what I see as rather insipid inspiration from our coach is my major concern for the near future.

That's an incredibly simplistic way of looking at it - are you saying that by spending "£x" it will guarantee you an incremental higher league position?

Taking Chelsea as an example, if that calculation was 1 higher league position for every £50m spent, that means they should be walking the Premier League? Sadly it doesn't work like that and even though their massive investment has meant a higher league position this year, that has taken well over a season to work. Also don't forget they also didn't sell two World Class CM's that would walk into any Top 6 PL sides!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I think the easy answer to your question is 'no'.

However, a combination of expectation from progress in previous seasons and the £200m-worth of talent that was SPAFFED over the summer, a good start to the season, up and down patches of form during the season and question marks from some fans about the style and other decisions means that a lot of people have come to the conclusion that it's 'yes'.

Taking a step back, I think it would be mad to get rid of a manager after such a relatively short amount of time and in a season where, if the team finishes in the top 10, one of the club's main ambitions has been achieved. If it all goes to shit and we are LANGUISHING at the bottom of the table and have just been thrashed by an aggregate 10-2 by Leeds and Palace, then maybe it's a different conversation, but I'm firmly in the FAB CAB right now.

That £200M is like a millstone around FH's neck. He didn't spend it, the club did. Combine new players not used to the PL, and a manager who isn't used to it, and we're doing ok.
Money spent means nothing, experience does.
He has had a record number of injuries.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

That £200M is like a millstone around FH's neck. He didn't spend it, the club did. Combine new players not used to the PL, and a manager who isn't used to it, and we're doing ok.
Money spent means nothing, experience does.
He has had a record number of injuries.

Believe me, *I* know that – which is why I always ham it up whenever I mention it – especially earlier in the season when half of the players weren't even playing (for whatever reason) in the first team at the time. The hierarchy have gone on record to say a lot of it was spent with the future in mind and they took advantage of their own profits and other club's PSR issues (Minteh a case in point).

I cut the guy a LOT of slack – probably more than most. To get rid of an employee you have put into a position in such a relatively short amount of time (when they haven't done anything sack-worthy and are not exactly failing at their job) would be bizarre in any industry and football isn't any different. IMO, like.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

Whilst I enjoy all these statistics being reeled out to support whatever side of the fence people sit on, it cannot be ignored that this season a significant amount of funds have been spent to upgrade the level of players in the club, compared to previous seasons.

That fact, along with what I see as rather insipid inspiration from our coach is my major concern for the near future.

I guess the previous manager left because although money was going to be spent, club policy dictated it was going to be spent on very young players. The current manager would have known when coming in that he wasn't going to get the players in who could fire him to the CL.

The players who came in who could have contributed this season have been injured the whole season.

So I don't think the money spent comment is fair criticism of Hurzeler. It arguably is a fair criticism of the clubs recruitment policy or medical staff / facilities

 

[cjd]

That's an incredibly simplistic way of looking at it - are you saying that by spending "£x" it will guarantee you an incremental higher league position?

Taking Chelsea as an example, if that calculation was 1 higher league position for every £50m spent, that means they should be walking the Premier League? Sadly it doesn't work like that and even though their massive investment has meant a higher league position this year, that has taken well over a season to work. Also don't forget they also didn't sell two World Class CM's that would walk into any Top 6 PL sides!

No, I haven't said that at all. ( I.e. guaranteed success ).

It just cannot be ignored that a lot of quality players were signed this season. Players that increased the squad depth, so unlike previous seasons with similar numbers of injuries, previous coaches often had a large number of unproven youngsters on the bench as back up.

Why are you trying to make it sound far more complicated than it is....?

 

[Flounce]

Simple answer is NO but for me it’s his inability/refusal to change tactics during games or dependant on who we are playing or when we have a shit load of injuries. We did it at Newcastle in the league and it worked. Why isn’t he doing it during this bad run?

I’d be 100% behind him if he did, regardless of results.

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

I cut the guy a LOT of slack – probably more than most. To get rid of an employee you have put into a position in such a relatively short amount of time (when they haven't done anything sack-worthy and are not exactly failing at their job) would be bizarre in any industry and football isn't any different. IMO, like.

OK, but it is fairly normal in football

If we could sack FH and get someone in who we think would do slightly better, then fair enough, do it.

But, there's plenty of clubs who have thought they were upgrading then it turned out they very much weren't.

 

[Anger]

You can prove anything with stats.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

OK, but it is fairly normal in football

If we could sack FH and get someone in who we think would do slightly better, then fair enough, do it.

But, there's plenty of clubs who have thought they were upgrading then it turned out they very much weren't.

That's my point. The turnover of football managers is bonkers.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Simple answer is NO but for me it’s his inability/refusal to change tactics during games or dependant on who we are playing or when we have a shit load of injuries. We did it at Newcastle in the league and it worked. Why isn’t he doing it during this bad run?

I’d be 100% behind him if he did, regardless of results.

If you can explain a poor run of form to any football club, you can have a job for life. We are still doing better than last season and that is a fact.
Form is temporary.

Your support is conditional, as long as it's done the way you like it.

 

[The Grockle]

I think he's doing a pretty solid job overall.

The way results have come has been somewhat champagne or razor blades which has made the fans a bit reactionary....good start- pack your bags ready for Barcelona, he's better than RDZ average results-he's finding his way/rubbish -5 on the bounce- we're finishing top fail to win in 6 SACK HIM

the only thing that's made this campaign disappointing is that for large parts of the season we've been very well placed for a high finish. Had we sat 10th place throughout the season I'd argue we'd all be pretty satisfied.

A horrible analogy but we pulled the fit girl on the first day of the holiday and now we're grumbling because we're stuck with the ugly girl who tastes like fags and wkd.

 

[Balders]

Believe me, *I* know that – which is why I always ham it up whenever I mention it – especially earlier in the season when half of the players weren't even playing (for whatever reason) in the first team at the time. The hierarchy have gone on record to say a lot of it was spent with the future in mind and they took advantage of their own profits and other club's PSR issues (Minteh a case in point).

I cut the guy a LOT of slack – probably more than most. To get rid of an employee you have put into a position in such a relatively short amount of time (when they haven't done anything sack-worthy and are not exactly failing at their job) would be bizarre in any industry and football isn't any different. IMO, like.

And whatever happens to the £200m investment, depending on which side of the fence you sit, will dictate who is to blame. If they are indeed "duds" then it's down to the Club and Recruitment, however they may not be "duds", it's just that we don't have a decent or experienced Manager to fulfill their full potential ;-)

 

[GT49er]

I guess the previous manager left because although money was going to be spent, club policy dictated it was going to be spent on very young players. Cashin is 23 too.

That's not what really happened though - Ferdi and Wieffer are both 25, and O'Riley is 23. Even Gomez is 22 - hardly a baby.

The current manager would have known when coming in that he wasn't going to get the players in who could fire him to the CL.
The players who came in who could have contributed this season have been injured the whole season.
So I don't think the money spent comment is fair criticism of Hurzeler. It arguably is a fair criticism of the clubs recruitment policy or medical staff / facilities

Looks more like a faut on the recruitment side rather than Hurzeler's fault, so in one respect he's done OK, maybe even slightly better than OK. But, he hasn't captured the imagination, hasn't got us all excited about our manager; it's all a bit grey, isn't it.

 

[spence]

Check this thread out when we fail to beat West Ham.