What have Coventry done differently to us?

[Rofesleg]

Signings I think that Wilder wanted:
Lenihan, Smith, Clarke, Steffen, Giles, Mowatt

I think Muniz was last in the line when all the strikers Wilder wanted fell through. We had tried to buy him before Scott turned up.

Roberts was a simple case of plugging the gaps.

Signings I think Scott pushed for as players to increase in value: Forss, Hoppe, Conteh. I had forgotten that Boyd Munce arrived in the previous January. Until Carrick took over, Wilder was playing Forss under protest and had zero interest in the academy or Hoppe. Admittedly, Carrick and pretty much every other one of this managers has felt the same about Hoppe.

I would agree with most of that but it is a bit harsh to say that the "Scott players with the exception of Forss" didn't convince.
That only leaves Hoppe. So one did well and one didn't.
I wouldn't count Conteh as he wasn't signed as a first team player and pretty much went straight out on loan.

The reason we almost got promoted was due to the unexpected form of Chuba, the rise of Hackney, plus excellent January loans to keep the momentum.
And of course Carrick's coaching and tactics. I'm not sure that is all accidental.

We also had almost no changes to the starting line-up for weeks and weeks until the wheels fell off at the end of the season.

 

[Fattyfoggon]

Sort of. But it wasn't a linear continuous improvement in league position or squad quality.

After we beat them in the play-off semis they sold Andre Gray for big money.

They then finished:

9th, 10th, 9th, 11th, 3rd and then 3rd when they got promoted through the play-offs.

They had a high turnover of players each year and didn't really spend big money on any single player until Toney.

Suppose the point being it's not that straightforward or easy and it took Brentford a good few years to get it right (and even then they had to do it via the play-offs).

Yeah think my point was they were not always going for low cost unknowns they actually invested a fair bit of money from there previous profits as in Toney just hoping we do something similar

 

[GazBoro]

Might be kicking themselves for the selling Gyokeres now. His goals may have gotten them over the line.

 

[indeedido]

I don't think there was a single Brentford player who was in the playoff team that we beat, and their team that eventually achieved promotion. Every player had changed in between, and the likes of Watkins, Bhenrama, Konza and Maupay had all been bought and sold in the time in between.

No one wants to sell their best players, but it is possible to do it and keep moving forward.

Or you could do a Brighton and keep your best players, compliment them until you are promoted, then spend big to establish in PL for 3-4 seasons.

 

[Frozen Horse]

Or you could do a Brighton and keep your best players, compliment them until you are promoted, then spend big to establish in PL for 3-4 seasons.

I really couldn't. I'm not that rich.

 

[Corcaigh_the_Cat]

I really couldn't. I'm not that rich.

Neither is Gibbo.

 

[Bruce]

I would agree with most of that but it is a bit harsh to say that the "Scott players with the exception of Forss" didn't convince.
That only leaves Hoppe. So one did well and one didn't.
I wouldn't count Conteh as he wasn't signed as a first team player and pretty much went straight out on loan.

I agree. In my head I was sure there were more along the Forss and Hoppe line.

I think what it was is that January 22 was the first window with Scott in place. There is some disagreement over how much input he had into the summer of 21 window under Warnock. In January 22 we signed McGree, Boyd Munce, Connolly and Balogun. Out of them, McGree did ok but there were a lot of fans claiming he was a waste of money (nothing new there). Obviously Connolly and Balogun were loans but it felt like the hit rate was roughly 0.5 out of 4.

Then in the summer there was a very obvious twin track of loans and Championship pros for Wilder along with young, "development" players for the club. By the time Wilder left, the development players were simply not featuring.

At that point, it was hard to see any signs of the club putting a sustainable model in place. That changed bigly this summer but of course our start to this season was so bad that it was fair to doubt Scott. People were unsure whether the problem was recruitment, Carrick or both (or Gibson for not spending more).

 

[Ash88]

Or you could do a Brighton and keep your best players, compliment them until you are promoted, then spend big to establish in PL for 3-4 seasons.

Brighton finished 6th in 2013/14 - sold their star striker, who scored 16 goals, for £10m - lost both their starting CBs - and then signed loads of bad players, finishing 20th the following season on 47 points.

Which players did they "keep"? - because their star players in 2016/17 when they got promoted were all signed 6-12 months earlier.

 

[FishofContemplation]

Let's face it, we had very kind draws on the way - their achievement was much greater.

They had an easier passage to the quarter-final than we did with every match at home against lesser opposition, including Maidstone United in the last 16. The quarter-final victory at wolves was more impressive than anything we managed, but we still both had a pretty easy time of it.

 

[Bernieslavenschin]

Reality is most teams have 2-3 seasons of seriously challenging for promotion followed by a lul.
Cov are in the same situation as us in this regard.
Doesn’t really matter ‘what they’ve done differently’ unless they get promoted in next couple of seasons.
Hard to hold onto your best players and continually challenge

 

[BoroMart]

Reality is most teams have 2-3 seasons of seriously challenging for promotion followed by a lul.
Cov are in the same situation as us in this regard.
Doesn’t really matter ‘what they’ve done differently’ unless they get promoted in next couple of seasons.
Hard to hold onto your best players and continually challenge

Not sure who covs best players are, they’ve for a good top ten squad but since shedding Hamer and Gyokeres I don’t think they have any 10m players

 

[Bernieslavenschin]

Not sure who covs best players are, they’ve for a good top ten squad but since shedding Hamer and Gyokeres I don’t think they have any 10m players

Fair,
I don’t watch them enough to counter. That being said I think it would be a rarity for them to challenge more than a few seasons in a row.

 

[NorthumberlandBoro]

in

 

[indeedido]

Brighton finished 6th in 2013/14 - sold their star striker, who scored 16 goals, for £10m - lost both their starting CBs - and then signed loads of bad players, finishing 20th the following season on 47 points.

Which players did they "keep"? - because their star players in 2016/17 when they got promoted were all signed 6-12 months earlier.

They did sell Ulloa for £9m in the summer of 2014 and Buckley to the Mackems for about £3m.
The only player they then sold in the next 7 windows was Rob Hunt who they flogged to Oldham for £350k in July 2017.
Play offs 2015-16, Promoted 2016-17, PL since then.

I'd pretty much say that defines them keeping their best players wouldn't you?
Then of course they geared up massively with a nett £200m spend across their first 3 seasons in the PL.

 

[Ipad1977]

I agree. In my head I was sure there were more along the Forss and Hoppe line.

I think what it was is that January 22 was the first window with Scott in place. There is some disagreement over how much input he had into the summer of 21 window under Warnock. In January 22 we signed McGree, Boyd Munce, Connolly and Balogun. Out of them, McGree did ok but there were a lot of fans claiming he was a waste of money (nothing new there). Obviously Connolly and Balogun were loans but it felt like the hit rate was roughly 0.5 out of 4.

Then in the summer there was a very obvious twin track of loans and Championship pros for Wilder along with young, "development" players for the club. By the time Wilder left, the development players were simply not featuring.

At that point, it was hard to see any signs of the club putting a sustainable model in place. That changed bigly this summer but of course our start to this season was so bad that it was fair to doubt Scott. People were unsure whether the problem was recruitment, Carrick or both (or Gibson for not spending more).

Tbf out of that lot, Boyd Munce was always a chance our arm, low cost player we hoped to develop. I'd also argue that Balogun was decent if not spectacular. the problem being that he wasn't used to potential, with the agreed Turds Conolly being inexplicably repetitively used instead.

 

[Frozen Horse]

Any chance that can be broken down by teams that finished 3rd/4th vs 5th/6th? Coventry and Sunderland scraped in on the last day of the season last year. They were both one of the 6/7 teams capable of playoffs with very little between them on 70/69 in 5th and 6th all the way down to Swansea in 10th with 66. They were in that pack with a basically 1 in 3 chance of making the playoffs so it isn't a huge shock that they won't make it this year. We were a bit of an anomaly last season because while we weren't far ahead of them our season only really started after Carrick took over so we were more of an auto candidate than a playoff scraping one so to finish where we have I would assume is statistically unlikely.

I think the teams that are automatic capable teams (3rd/4th place) will probably be heavily skewed towards those auto/playoff winning stats and the scrapers are more likely to be in those bottom sections.

OK, it becomes quite a bit more complicated: the team finishing 3rd are less likely to be in the championship the next season than the team finishing 6th. First, here's what's happened in the last 15 seasons (so everything is out of 15):

	Promoted that season	Automatic next season	Won playoffs next season	Lost in playoffs next season	Missed playoffs	Relegated
3rd	40%	13.%	7%	7%	33%	0
4th	27%	13%	7%	20%	33%	0
5th	27%	13%	0	0	47%	13%
6th	7%	27%	7%	20%	40%	0

However, if a team doesn't win the playoffs, i.e. definitely starts the next season in the championship, it looks like this:

	Automatic next season	Won playoffs next season	Lost in playoffs next season	Missed playoffs	Relegated
3rd	22%	11%	11%	55%	0
4th	18%	9%	27%	55%	0
5th	18%	0	0	64%	18%
6th	28%	7%	21%	43%	0

I've ignored decimals if all rows don't add up exactly to 100.

It's amazing what I can find time to do when I should be working....

 

[Bruce]

OK, it becomes quite a bit more complicated: the team finishing 3rd are less likely to be in the championship the next season than the team finishing 6th. First, here's what's happened in the last 15 seasons (so everything is out of 15):

	Promoted that season	Automatic next season	Won playoffs next season	Lost in playoffs next season	Missed playoffs	Relegated
3rd	40%	13.%	7%	7%	33%	0
4th	27%	13%	7%	20%	33%	0
5th	27%	13%	0	0	47%	13%
6th	7%	27%	7%	20%	40%	0

However, if a team doesn't win the playoffs, i.e. definitely starts the next season in the championship, it looks like this:

	Automatic next season	Won playoffs next season	Lost in playoffs next season	Missed playoffs	Relegated
3rd	22%	11%	11%	55%	0
4th	18%	9%	27%	55%	0
5th	18%	0	0	64%	18%
6th	28%	7%	21%	43%	0

I've ignored decimals if all rows don't add up exactly to 100.

It's amazing what I can find time to do when I should be working....

It's all small numbers but it does indicate that if you make the playoffs but don't get promoted, you've only got around a 50/50 chance of making the playoffs next season. Probably you can hypothesise that about 1/3 of the teams who make the playoffs but don't get promoted, get promoted next season with about 2/3 not doing so.

If you think of last season:
Sunderland are a classic screw-up case. Both us and Coventry lost more than 1/2 their 1st team due to over-reliance on loans. The rebuild needed was just too much of a hurdle. None of last season's playoff contenders will be promoted this year.

The previous season it was Huddersfield, Sheff Utd and Luton who ended up 3rd-6th but didn't get promoted. Huddersfield collapsed. Sheff utd managed to make the most of their remaining parachute payments and Luton were on an improving trajectory so they both made it the next year.

 

[Corcaigh_the_Cat]

Worth a hoof?

 

[Ipad1977]

Worth a hoof?

Aye, it most certainly is.

 

[Ipad1977]

Yeah all of the above are better, league doesn't tell lies.

Think this is my favourite comment.

The deckchairs better than us, Jesus Christ we must be absolute fannies indeed if this was the case. You are quite correct though in saying that the league table doesn't lie. Neither does a scoreboard that says 0-4 to the away side, or even 1-1 with half the players from one side on crutches near enough.