|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 23,084
Liverpool Legend
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 23,084 |
If expectation exceeds the owners ability to deliver should we all settle for that? It's up to you, but I expect you've got a many years of disappointment ahead of you if you think much is going to change. Seems i will if the majority of fans decided to bend over and take it like a bitch.
That job interview was going so well until I realized I was fukked up on acid in the middle of a cornfield naked and talking to a scarecrow.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,813
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,813 |
Not including a freak result, ie last year's runner up position, is important if you want petspective. We only achieved it due to a low workload and freak set of circumstances so it shouldn't be taken into consideration when looking at our progress. It was a one off and not a reflection on where we were as a team. In other words, although we finished 2nd that didn't mean we were the 2nd best team in the country. You need to look at our average final positions over a longer period to see if we are progressing. This is completely ridiculous. The factors involved in our 'freak position' last year need to be taken into account for when forecasting expectations for this year, they don't mean that one year should be completely written off. Take that to a board meeting somewhere and watch how you get utterly laughed out of the room. The plan that was right 2 or 3 years ago, isn't necessarily the correct plan for now (or more aptly for the beginning of this season). You need to look at where you are at the end of last season, all the factors you mention should be taken into account to realise that competing for the title was unrealistic, progress therefore would have been securing a top 4 spot, not getting top 4 would be regressing. Completely omitting last year is utterly ridiculous and serves no tangible purpose other than the fact that with it, your point is completely disproved. You're wrong on many levels. A lot of boardrooms, regardless of industry, would remove the best and the worst performance, and average the remaing results in order to measure progress, and also forecast accurately for the future. That way, freak results (both good and bad) can be seperated from an otherwise normal year.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,813
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,813 |
If expectation exceeds the owners ability to deliver should we all settle for that? It's up to you, but I expect you've got a many years of disappointment ahead of you if you think much is going to change. Seems i will if the majority of fans decided to bend over and take it like a bitch. Listen....WE ARE NOT AT THE SAME TABLE AS THE BIG BOYS ANYMORE. For LFC to challenge the top 4 is going to take a few more years of increasing our commercial revenue (richer owners will not help to get around FFP). Expecting league success with LFC is like expecting Stoke to suddenly get regular european football.....hiw is it going to happen?? You can 'expect' it as much as you like, but you're going to be disappointed for the forseeable future. The main reason is FFP, but we are also going to have a £110m stadium redevelopment loan to payback over 5 years which will restrict spending even further.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
Not including a freak result, ie last year's runner up position, is important if you want petspective. We only achieved it due to a low workload and freak set of circumstances so it shouldn't be taken into consideration when looking at our progress. It was a one off and not a reflection on where we were as a team. In other words, although we finished 2nd that didn't mean we were the 2nd best team in the country. You need to look at our average final positions over a longer period to see if we are progressing. This is completely ridiculous. The factors involved in our 'freak position' last year need to be taken into account for when forecasting expectations for this year, they don't mean that one year should be completely written off. Take that to a board meeting somewhere and watch how you get utterly laughed out of the room. The plan that was right 2 or 3 years ago, isn't necessarily the correct plan for now (or more aptly for the beginning of this season). You need to look at where you are at the end of last season, all the factors you mention should be taken into account to realise that competing for the title was unrealistic, progress therefore would have been securing a top 4 spot, not getting top 4 would be regressing. Completely omitting last year is utterly ridiculous and serves no tangible purpose other than the fact that with it, your point is completely disproved. You're wrong on many levels. A lot of boardrooms, regardless of industry, would remove the best and the worst performance, and average the remaing results in order to measure progress, and also forecast accurately for the future. That way, freak results (both good and bad) can be seperated from an otherwise normal year. It's funny that you call me wrong and then go on to make such a school boy error that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about this subject material. That is true for something like a retail position where an outlier could skew forecasts that are based on a similar starting position to the unexpectedly high achieving year, but completely untrue in a business where a high achieving year results in more capital to reinvest, such as getting champions league and selling a player for 75 million pounds, or a buy side investment banking business to continue the corporate analogy. You snowball that success in this industry, you don't remove the best year unless it results in a drastically unchanged starting position to the year before. But it did and that's why your ridiculous point falls down around your ears, again.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926
Liverpool Legend
|
|
Liverpool Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 22,926 |
Not including a freak result, ie last year's runner up position, is important if you want petspective. We only achieved it due to a low workload and freak set of circumstances so it shouldn't be taken into consideration when looking at our progress. It was a one off and not a reflection on where we were as a team. In other words, although we finished 2nd that didn't mean we were the 2nd best team in the country. You need to look at our average final positions over a longer period to see if we are progressing. This is completely ridiculous. The factors involved in our 'freak position' last year need to be taken into account for when forecasting expectations for this year, they don't mean that one year should be completely written off. Take that to a board meeting somewhere and watch how you get utterly laughed out of the room. The plan that was right 2 or 3 years ago, isn't necessarily the correct plan for now (or more aptly for the beginning of this season). You need to look at where you are at the end of last season, all the factors you mention should be taken into account to realise that competing for the title was unrealistic, progress therefore would have been securing a top 4 spot, not getting top 4 would be regressing. Completely omitting last year is utterly ridiculous and serves no tangible purpose other than the fact that with it, your point is completely disproved. You're wrong on many levels. A lot of boardrooms, regardless of industry, would remove the best and the worst performance, and average the remaing results in order to measure progress, and also forecast accurately for the future. That way, freak results (both good and bad) can be seperated from an otherwise normal year. It's funny that you call me wrong and then go on to make such a school boy error that demonstrates a complete lack of understanding about this subject material. That is true for something like a retail position where an outlier could skew forecasts that are based on a similar starting position to the unexpectedly high achieving year, but completely untrue in a business where a high achieving year results in more capital to reinvest, such as getting champions league and selling a player for 75 million pounds, or a buy side investment banking business to continue the corporate analogy. You snowball that success in this industry, you don't remove the best year unless it results in a drastically unchanged starting position to the year before. But it did and that's why your ridiculous point falls down around your ears, again. To be fair, in business you do take out exceptional items when you are appraising performance and I know this because i do it a lot as it's part of my job. That said, it's not the same in football and even if it was, I don't think anybody expected us to be champions, we only expected at least 4th which was completely legitimate. Rodgers has failed miserably and I hope he leaves. Getting beaten by Villa at Wembley shows that he cannot manage under pressure.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,381 |
To be fair, in business you do take out exceptional items when you are appraising performance and I know this because i do it a lot as it's part of my job. That said, it's not the same in football and even if it was, I don't think anybody expected us to be champions, we only expected at least 4th which was completely legitimate. Rodgers has failed miserably and I hope he leaves. Getting beaten by Villa at Wembley shows that he cannot manage under pressure.
Again it depends what business you're in, if your starting point isn't the same in year 3, as it was in your forecast for the next 4 years, then you re-access your forecast if the starting point is different. What you're talking about is, as I said, more of a retail business where you ignore outliers that skew results. I know this because it is my job too. You categorically don't miss out an entire year for the ridiculous reasons posted above in a business where you reaccess yearly based on your starting position and have much capital you have to spend. It's a ludicrous and illogical statement that only has a place in a totally different and specific type of industry forecast.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,679
Under 23 Player
|
|
Under 23 Player
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 1,679 |
To be fair, in business you do take out exceptional items when you are appraising performance and I know this because i do it a lot as it's part of my job. That said, it's not the same in football and even if it was, I don't think anybody expected us to be champions, we only expected at least 4th which was completely legitimate. Rodgers has failed miserably and I hope he leaves. Getting beaten by Villa at Wembley shows that he cannot manage under pressure.
That is dependent on the type of business and what time period you're looking at. BRK is 100 percent correct, FSG's five year plan means nothing if in Rodger's second or third season he excels and as a result we have more money and everything else. You're sweeping statement of business is completely wrong, again as BRK says it's only true for certain types of businesses, not all. The type we are talking about here (which tbf you and BRK also point out) is completely the wrong place for just forgetting about an entire year because it was unexpected or extreme. After we fnished 2nd the original plan was completley null and void, we had 100+ million to spend and lots of promise, but like Darcus points out there were added pressures not least the number of games, so you don't expect 2nd again, but as you rightly say 4th was easily achievable and was the new plan. You don't leave out that entire year in this situation, nor do you in many types of business so you're first sentence is far to generalised making it wrong, but like I said tbf to you you do mention how it doesn't apply in this situation which is correct.
Last edited by mybloodisred; 25/04/15 12:13 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
