I Make Predictions (Round 14)

(Note: I have changed the title from Part 3 to Round 14 because that is more informative.)

Last week, using his scoring system, Mark Lawrenson got 8 points and I got four points.   He got six games right with one correct score, while I only got two right, but I got the correct score in the Burnley-Aston Villa game.  His celebrity guest got eight points.

Again, I note that only two games were decided by two or more goals yet Lawrenson picked four games to be decided by that kind of margin.  Of course, my system did not do very well this weekend with only two correct predictions, but I designed it to maximize my chances of getting an exact score based upon the scoring system Lawrenson is using.

I am will do another round of predictions using the same rules outlined here.

Based upon my system my picks are

Manchester United-Stoke              2-1

Burnley-Newcastle                           0-1

Palace-Aston Villa                            2-1

Leicester-Liverpool                         1-2

Swansea-QPR                                   2-1

West Brom-West  Ham                  1-2

Sunderland-Manchester City        0-1

Everton-Hull                                    2-1

Chelsea-Spurs                                 2-1

Arsenal-Southampton                   1-1

This week I have only predicted one draw which seems a bit low but that is the way it goes.  I also picked 7 2-1 games which also seems unlikely.  But still, it is vastly more likely that seven 2-0 games.

NOTICE:  Given the short time before our next game and the fact that I am training a new secretary this week I don’t have time to do a “Thirteen games-26 points” post, but I will do a Fourteen game post by next Monday.  Of course, if we lose both upcoming games it will feel less interesting.  Also, I apologize for publishing my Twelve game post twice, albeit with a slightly different commentary.  I got confused.

UPDATED: To fix minor error--I neglected to include Southampton's game in the scores for us prognosticators.

Great Moments in Recent Southampton History (Part 9)

Although quite recent, this obviously qualifies as a great moment.  I prepared this entry on the Tuesday after our big victory, but I will wait to post it until after our next loss.  Am I posting it next week after a game with Stoke?  Or did we go on a very long run and I am posting this after we lose the FA Cup final to Portsmouth?  Anything is possible, but I suspect most Southampton fans would prefer the former.

http://prosoccertalk.nbcsports.com/2014/10/18/southampton-8-0-sunderland-its-possible-saints-are-still-scoring/

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/29580147

My personal view of the game was considerably less than great, however.  I accidently set my Ipad to wake me up at 5:50 am instead of 6:50 am. (The game started at 7 am my time.)  I reset the alarm and went back to sleep.  The alarm never went off again.  Fortunately, I woke up on my own at 7:10 am just in time to see the replays of the first goal.

I was able to watch the game until about the 52 minute mark when the NBC Live app stopped working.  All active BPL games—not just ours—simply froze at the same moment in time and things never started working right again for those games.  I tried both my Ipads and my computer, but they were all the same.  As a result, I missed goals four through eight—although I saw them later on replays, of course.

I feel quite deprived.  I missed the chance to enjoy the game while it happened.  Sure, the result is what matters, but watching games live is what makes it fun. 

My Ipad alarm finally went off at 6:50 pm as I returned home from dinner.

I Make Predictions (Part 2)

Last week, using his scoring system I got six points and Mark Lawrenson got four.   We both got four games right, but I got one score (Manchester City-Swansea) exactly right which is worth an extra two points.  This proves that I know more than he does and my experiment is a success.

More seriously, nothing is proven by one weekend of results.  I do note, however, that only two games were decided by two or more goals whereas Lawrenson picked five games to be decided by that kind of margin.  Not that he knows that we are competing, but I suspect that if he continues to pick half the games to be decided by big margins while I never pick anyone to win by more than one goal, he will be the worse for the comparison.

I am going to do at least one more round of predictions.  I will be using the same rules outlined here. 

Based upon my system my picks are

West Brom-Arsenal        1-1

Burnley-AV                       1-1

Liverpool-Stoke               1-1

Manchester U-Hull         2-1

QPR-Leicester                  1-1

Swansea-Palace              2-1

West Ham-Newcastle    1-1

Sunderland-Chelsea       0-1

Southampton-Man C     2-1

Spurs-Everton                 1-1

I seem to have predicted a lot of draws because there are a lot of games where the home club is just below the visitor in the table.  If I were doing this subjectively, I would not pick six draws in one week, but the lack of subjectivity is the whole point of my system—other than the subjectivity in setting up the rules, of course.  (If I were going to slightly modify the system subjectively, I would just add one goal to Chelsea’s predicted total each week.  This would mean that I would never predict Chelsea to lose—a result I would be comfortable with.)

What Happens if Southampton is Relegated in 2016?

I know that is a pretty strange question.  This season is going so well.  Why would I worry about being relegated next season?  Actually, I am not particularly worried about Southampton being relegated next season.  What I am concerned about is the recent changes to the Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules in the Championship and how they will affect the three teams relegated in 2016 and subsequent years as well as the Competitive balance in the Championship.

To put it simply, the new rules discriminate heavily in favor of teams with rich owners who have just been relegated from the Premier League.  Of course, football has always discriminated in favor of rich owners and relegated teams have always had some advantages.  FFP has just changed that universal truth somewhat to discriminate in favor of established teams over upstart teams with rich owners.  However, the new rules go way overboard in favoring recently relegated teams.

The new Championship FFP rules are explained on the Football League’s web site here.  The rules have regularized the Championship’s FFP rules with the Premier League’s FFP rules.  This undoubtedly seemed like a good idea, but it could be devastating to the competitive balance of the Championship and lead to some teams digging themselves into a FFP hole out of which they cannot easily get.  I will explain.

I don’t want to completely rehash the FFP rules in effect in the Premier League.  I have discussed them several times and a complete discussion is available at the Financial Fair Play web site which is linked in the sidebar.  Basically BPL clubs are evaluated over a rolling three year period and are limited to losses of £105 million.  These losses exclude money spent on “good” things such as facility and stadium improvements and youth programs.  If a club does not have a rich owner willing to put money into the club, the limit is £15 million of losses over three years.  As I discussed in my four part series (part four here), the likely unwillingness of our owner to spend £90 million (plus) of her own money every three years puts us at a competitive disadvantage relative to Manchester City and Chelsea, but likely not much of a disadvantage with respect to anyone else—and Manchester City and Chelsea are also subject to the UEFA FFP rules which restrict owner contributions to under roughly £25 million over three years .

The Championship has now switched from a FFP system which evaluated clubs each year to a three year rolling system like the BPL.  However, instead of a £35 million per year allowed loss, the allowed loss is £13 million.  However, if the owner does not contribute equity to cover the loss, Championship clubs will also be limited to £5 million a year in losses.

So far this approach probably seems quite reasonable—however, a problem arises out of the way the new rules handle relegated teams.   The allowable losses for relegated clubs are calculated on a three year rolling basis based upon the league in which the club was playing each year.  Thus, a club relegated in 2016 is allowed losses of £35 million for 2014-2015, £35 million for 2015-2016, and £13 million for 2016-2017—a total of £78 million over the three year period.  On the other hand, a club that has played in the Championship all three years has an allowable loss of £32 million (not £39 million as you would expect because 2014-2015 is a phase in year with the loss limited to £6 million).

A relegated club which was breaking even in the BPL (admittedly, an unlikely assumption given our rich owner premise) would have the ability to overspend a similarly financially prudent Championship club by £46 million pounds.  Further, the relegated club would have its parachute payment (currently £15 million in the first year) to spend as well so its potential overspend is £61 million.  Given how much just relegated teams want to get back into the BPL, it is likely that at least some owners will spend a large chunk of this money. 

Moreover, this analysis compares the relegated team to a fiscally prudent Championship club—such clubs are few and far between.  The Financial Fair Play web site discussed the Championship clubs likely to be facing penalties based upon their recent financial losses and it is not a pretty picture.  See here.    Of the 21 Championship clubs which were not recently relegated BPL teams (to whom the FFP rules did not yet apply) seven are likely or very likely to face FFP penalties while ten are  unlikely or very unlikely to be penalized.  However, only three of the clubs broke even or better in 2012-2013.  If such trends continue, the clubs relegated in 2016 will face a league full of clubs who have already used their allowable losses for the past two years and would be limited to a loss of just £13 million.  Some of the teams may have exceeded the allowable losses and will have to lose even less in 2016-2017.  Some clubs might also be subject to a transfer ban which would certainly not help them to compete.  And, of course, many teams will not have rich owners and will need to break even simply to keep afloat.

The picture is not quite this extreme because the clubs relegated in 2015 would also be receiving parachute payments and would have one year of £35 million allowable losses to work with.  Clubs relegated in 2013 and 2014 would also be receiving parachute payments in lesser amounts.  Nevertheless, this system creates huge advantage for the recently relegated clubs who could easily justify spending lots of money to try to get right back into the BPL.

However, such teams face a major downside should they spend this kind of crazy money.  Suppose a club relegated in 2016 shoots for an immediate return to the BPL by taking a loss of £60 million in 2016-2017, but they are still not promoted.  What happens to them?

Assuming they broke even in 2015-2016, they have a total loss of £60 already in the books for the three year period ending in 2018.  Their allowable loss for that three year period is £61 million.  It is hard to imagine that a team that lost £60 million in the previous season could reduce that loss to just £1 million in the next season. 

That is not the only problem, however.  Remember that the losses are only permitted to exceed £15 million in a three year period if the owner chips in equity to cover the losses above that amount.  In my scenario, that would mean that the owner of the relegated team would have contributed £45 million in equity to cover the losses in 2016-2017.  To cover the £1 million additional loss in 2017-2018, the owner would have to contribute another £1 million in equity.  Obviously, this is no big deal.  The real problem arises in 2018-2019 if the club still misses promotion—which is certainly a likely result if they have had to reduce a £60 million loss to a £1 million loss.

In 2018-2019, the club will have been a Championship team for three years.  They no longer have a generous allowed loss of £35 million for a BPL season to work with.  Instead, their allowable three year loss is now £39. However, the club has the £61 million loss over the last two year hanging over their head.  In other words, they must make a profit of £22 million. Has a Championship club ever made a profit of £22 million?

There is also the problem of the allowable size of the equity contribution.  In the Championship the limit is £24 million over three years—yet the owner has already contributed £46 million.  I do not know if a club is permitted to distribute profits to reduce past equity contributions.  If they are, the full £22 million profit would have to be distributed.  (Of course, the cash would not all be available because of taxes.)  If not, the club is stuck in violation of the FFP rules.

A sensible relegated club will realize this and will not take a £60 million loss in their first year back in the Championship.  However, the term “sensible relegated club” may be an oxymoron.   And if they are promoted, the BPL’s more lenient FFP rules would protect them from the consequences of their Championship overspending.

If the club behaves more sensible and take a lesser loss the system still is anticompetitive.  Even a £30 million loss (plus parachute payments) gives the club a tremendous competitive advantage versus its poorer Championship competition.  Of course, even if the recently relegated club elects to take a smaller loss but still fails to get promoted, it will face FFP problems in subsequent years—although not nearly as severe.

On the surface, it makes sense to regularize the Championship and BPL FFP rules.  Upon closer analysis it seems to be a mistake.  The old rules gave relegated teams a one year holiday during which they did not face a transfer ban if they overspent.  However, if they got promoted to the BPL, all clubs were subject to a “tax” proportionate to their one year losses.  (This is the problem QPR and Leicester face next month.)  After that, the clubs were subject to the same rules as everyone else on a year-by-year basis. Since six teams leave the Championship each year, a year-by-year approach seems more sensible. 

Twelve Games, Twenty-??? Points: What does it mean? (Part 3)

 I just can’t control myself so here is the point total summary for Premier League teams after twelve games in a 20 team league.  I only looked at teams with 21 or more points. 

21 Points:  13 teams        Range:  3-13       Average finish:  6.62

22 Points:  18 teams        Range:  1-13       Average finish:  6.11

23 Points:  13 teams        Range: 2-8           Average finish:  4.85

24 Points:  13 teams        Range: 1-9           Average finish:  3.15

25 Points:  9 teams          Range  1-10         Average finish:  4.11

26 Points:  5 teams          Range: 1-4           Average finish:  2.40

27 Points:  6 teams          Range:  1-2          Average finish:  1.50

28 Points:  7 teams          Range:  2-6          Average finish:  3.29

29 Points:  5 teams          Range: 1-3           Average finish:  2.00

30 Points:  4 teams          Range: 1-5           Average finish:  2.50

31 Points: 3 teams           Range: 1-2           Average finish:  1.33

32 Points:  No teams

33 Points:  No teams

34 Points:  1 team            Range: 1               Average finish:  1.00

Two teams eventually finished first with less than 21 points in 12 games:  Manchester United (19 points) in 1996-1997 and Arsenal (20 points) in 2001-2002.  Maybe I should have left the cut off at 19 points, but I am not going back and doing it again.

Once again, we cannot reach the cut off line which appears to all but guarantee a great season which is 29 points in 12 games.  Only one team has failed to finish in what would now be a Champions League slot after getting 29 or more points. Although, clubs with 26 points have finished no worse than sixth place which is pretty good which would mean we only need a draw against Aston Villa.  However, since it looks like points are going to be harder to come by over the next several weeks, we should grab the three if we can.

This chart makes particularly clear the historic nature of Chelsea’s performance so far this season.  Only one team has ever done better.  It really looks like the title race is over unless Chelsea has a massive number of injuries.  Aside from us, only Manchester City can plausibly be viewed as a title contender on a historical basis.  It is not that Chelsea’s eight point margin over City is insurmountable on its own.  Lots of teams have passed teams that were eight points ahead of them with 26 games left to play.  However, gaining eight points is a lot easier to do at the bottom or the middle of the table where the team ahead of you can reasonably be expected to drop lots of points.  Chelsea may not drop eight more points this entire season the way they are playing.

Even if Chelsea played the rest of the season at just a two points per game rate, Manchester City would need to play the rest of this season better than they did the entire last season to pass Chelsea.  And City does not look anywhere near as good this year as they did last year.  And it is hard to imagine Chelsea dropping 24 more points.

Of course, the near inevitability of a Chelsea victory is well known which is why the bookies are all offering only 1/6 or 1/7 odds on Chelsea.  At this point, I will be rooting for Chelsea to win all their games (except against us) because that is what will help us the most.

I Make Predictions as an Experiment

I noticed that Mark Lawrenson has picked us to lose 0-1 on Monday.   He could, of course, be right, but it seems like a stupid prediction.  We are playing well.  Aston Villa is playing poorly.  The only reason to pick Aston Villa to win (setting aside the views of optimistic fans) is to try to get credit for being unexpectedly right.

In my view, the goal of a prediction should be to get the prediction right and, perhaps, to learn something, not to look especially good when right and hope people forget when you are wrong.  As an experiment I have predicted this weekend's results based upon a simple set of rules.   I am posting this not because I believe there will be great interest in my predictions, but because I would like to be on the record so that I can know if I do well and not forget if I do poorly.

My rules are based upon the following assumptions:

First, I assume that eleven games worth of results gives real information that is more reliable than my feelings or “expert” analysis.  Therefore, I will pick the clubs who are doing well to beat the clubs that are doing poorly.

Second, only 33 games in 220 team games have been decided by a margin of two or more goals so I will never pick a team to win by two goals.

Third, clubs have scored 3 or more goals only 31 times in 220 team games so I will never pick a team to score more than two goals.

Fourth, so far 30 percent of the games ended in draws.  I will create a system that picks about 30 percent of the games to end in draws.

Fifth, there is a home field advantage.

Here are my rules:

I look at the two clubs’ current place in the table.  I subtract three from the home team’s rank.  If the modified table places are within three, I pick a draw.  Otherwise, I pick the team with the best modified table place to win.

To decide the score, I looked at goals allowed by my predicted winning team and the goals scored by my predicted losing team.  If they total more than the games played by both sides (22 this week) I pick a score of 2-1.  Otherwise I pick 1-0. 

If I am picking a draw I will just pick 1-1 because I cannot come up with a simple way to decide between 0-0, 1-1, and 2-2.  (So far this season, this would not have worked well because there have been a lot of 0-0 and 2-2 draws and relatively few 1-1 draws.  I do not believe this reflects any real tendency.)

Based upon this system my picks are

Chelsea-West Brom        2-1

Everton-West Ham         1-2

Leicester-Sunderland     1-1

Man City-Swansea          2-1

Newcastle-QPR                2-1

Stoke-Burnley                  1-0

Arsenal-Man U                 2-1

Palace-Liverpool              1-1

Hull-Spurs                         1-1

AV-Southampton            0-1

Let’s see how I do.

Eleven Games—More Statistical Playing Around

Having recently discovered Statto.com’s handy dandy historical League tables. (Here.)  I could not resist playing around with them some more.

I wanted to examine how many points clubs that finish at the top tend to have after eleven games and compare that figure to their point total at the end of the season.  Once again, I started with the 1995-1996 season.  I only tabulated the top six places.  I also calculated the average points per game the teams earned over the remaining 27 games.

                                11 Games            Final                       Pts/G 12-38

First:                      24.32                     85.63                     2.27

Second:                24.26                     79.37                     2.04

Third:                    21.00                     73.89                     1.96

Fourth:                 19.74                     68.26                     1.80

Fifth:                     18.53                     63.47                     1.66

Sixth:                    17.89                     60.58                     1.58

Right now Southampton has more points that the average first place team did after elven games.  Of course, the average team with 25 points was not four points behind a team that had not yet lost.

I then looked at things from the opposite perspective—where did the teams that were in the top six after eleven games finish and how many points did they have at the end of the season.  I also calculated their points per game for the rest of the season.

                                11 Games            Final                       Pts/G 12-38        Final Position

First:                      26.26                     79.21                     1.96                        2.26

Second:                24.42                     77.84                     1.97                        2.53

Third:                    23.16                     68.68                     1.69                        4.21

Fourth:                 19.47                     64.58                     1.67                        5.58

Fifth:                     19.26                     59.68                     1.50                        7.42

Sixth:                    18.47                     55.79                     1.38                        8.63

There seems to be a genuine difference in quality between the clubs who are in first or second after eleven games and the clubs just below them.  If this holds true this year, that is a good sign for Southampton.  Of course, it is just a tendency, not an absolute law of nature so it could mean absolutely nothing.

Except it is pretty clear that bad teams are never in second place after eleven games and average teams are almost never in second place.  If I were a statistician I could do something to make this both clearer and more confusing.  Suffice it to say that Southampton is probably a good team.  We could be a very good team and we could be an average team, but historically the former is more likely than the latter.

It occurred to me, as I was part way though this, that it would be interesting to carry the chart all the way down to last place and see what it says about the relegation battle.  However, it would also be way too much work since I am tabulating this by hand.  And right now, I am not that interested in relegation issues.

Twelve Games, Twenty-??? Points: What does it mean? (Part 3)

Okay.  I just can’t control myself so here is the point total summary for Premier League teams after twelve games in a 20 team league.  I only looked at teams with 21 or more points.  Here is what I got:

21 Points:  13 teams        Range:  3-13       Average finish:  6.62

22 Points:  18 teams        Range:  1-13       Average finish:  6.11

23 Points:  13 teams        Range: 2-8           Average finish:  4.85

24 Points:  13 teams        Range: 1-9           Average finish:  3.15

25 Points:  9 teams          Range  1-10         Average finish:  4.11

26 Points:  5 teams          Range: 1-4           Average finish:  2.40

27 Points:  6 teams          Range:  1-2          Average finish:  1.50

28 Points:  7 teams          Range:  2-6          Average finish:  3.29

29 Points:  5 teams          Range: 1-3           Average finish:  2.00

30 Points:  4 teams          Range: 1-5           Average finish:  2.50

31 Points: 3 teams           Range: 1-2           Average finish:  1.33

32 Points:  No teams

33 Points:  No teams

34 Points:  1 team            Range: 1               Average finish:  1.00

Two teams eventually finished first with less than 21 points in 12 games:  Manchester United (19 points) in 1996-1997 and Arsenal (20 points) in 2001-2002.  Maybe I should have left the cut off at 19 games, but I am not going back and doing it all again.

If Chelsea wins its next game the league championship seems virtually over--and they ought to be able to beat West Brom at home. 

Once again, we cannot reach the cut off line which appears to all but guarantee a great season which is 29 points in 12 games.  Only one team has failed to finish in what would now be a Champions League slot after getting 29 or more points.

Although, six place is pretty good which would put the cut off line at 26 points which would mean we only need a draw against Aston Villa.

I do not have any more insightful analysis so the numbers will just have to speak for themselves.  I will try to resist doing thirteen games for a couple of weeks.

Eleven Games, Twenty-??? Points: What does it mean? (Part 2)

If how many points a club has after ten games is significant, surely how many points they have after eleven games must be at least ten percent more significant?

Maybe not.  But I decided to tabulate the information anyway.  And this time I am doing it at a reasonable hour--at least in terms of California time.  I decided to post this now, rather than after Saturday’s games so that people will know what they want to cheer for.

I looked at the points achieved by each team after eleven games in the Premier League since it went to 20 teams and compared it to the teams’ final league position.  I only looked at teams with 19 or more points.  Here is what I got:

19 Points:  17 teams        Range:  1-13       Average finish:  5.76

20 Points:  23 teams        Range:  2-17       Average finish:  6.70

21 Points:  12 teams        Range:  1-12       Average finish:  4.92

22 Points:  9 teams          Range:  1-9          Average finish:  5.44

23 Points:  10 teams        Range: 1-7           Average finish:  3.10

24 Points:  6 teams          Range: 1-3           Average finish:  2.00

25 Points:  12 teams        Range  2-10         Average finish:  3.83

26 Points:  8 teams          Range: 1-3           Average finish:  1.75

27 Points:  4 teams          Range:  1-5          Average finish:  2.00

28 Points:  2 teams          Range:  1-2          Average finish:  1.50

29 Points:  No teams

30 Points:  No teams

31 Points: 2 teams           Range: 1               Average finish: 1.00

The number one takeaway from this information is that if we beat Leicester today we cannot win the league, but if we lose or draw, we still have a chance.  Less frivolously, these numbers suggest that if Chelsea beats Liverpool they are very unlikely to finish anywhere but first--not just because it will be difficult to catch them but because only very, very good teams earn 29 points in 11 games.

If we win Saturday, only 16 teams in the 20 team Premier League era will have gotten off to better eleven game starts than us. Every team that had 25 points after eleven games finished in the top half.  If you exclude Wigan in 2005-2006, every 25 point team finished at least sixth.

All the 22 and 23 point teams have finished in the top half as well so we are looking pretty good no matter what happens.

Once again, we cannot reach the real cut off line which appears to be 26 points in eleven games.  Only one team has failed to finish in what would now be a Champions League slot after getting 26 or more points.

No team has ever won the league without earning at least 19 points in eleven games, but four teams have done that.  This means that we do not want Arsenal or West Ham to win.

That’s it for now.  Enjoy the numbers.

How Close Are We? (Part 2)

Back in August I used the data from Football Manager 2014 to consider how close we were to competing for Europe, the Champions League, and the title.  A lot has changed since then, but really not much according to the new database for Football Manager (FM) 2015.

In my original post (found here)  I compared our starting eleven with the starting eleven for Everton, Arsenal, and Manchester City.   I will repeat that comparison using the new database.  I believe the new database is supposed to represent the situation as of 2 September 2014.  It certainly was finalized before 19 September 2014 since it does not show Boruc as being out on loan to Bournemouth.

The numbers I am using are the FM Current Ability (CA) numbers which make for the easiest comparison.  As always, I recognize that these numbers are not reality, they are simply easily accessible and easy to use.

Football Manager 2014 (These are the FM 2014 numbers for the 2015 teams as of when I made the comparison—except for Southampton, which was for the end of last season.)

Pos         Southampton                    Everton                                    Arsenal                                 Man City

G             Baruc 142                             Howard 150                        Szczensy 150                      Hart 148

LB           Shaw 139                             Baines 160                           Gibbs 145                            Clichy 148

CB           Lovren 150                          Distin 160                             Mertesacker 159              Kompany 171

CB           Fonte 130                            Jagielka 156                        Koscielny 158                     Demakelis 148

RB           Clyne 140                             Coleman 147                      Debuchy 147                      Zabaleta 160

CM         Wanyama 146                    Barry 150                             Arteta 158                           Toure 176

CM         Schneiderlin 141               McCarthy 143                     Ramsey 158                     Fernandinho 155

AM         Lallana 152                          Miralles 155                        Ozil 171                                 Silva 174

AM         Rodriguez 142                    Pienaar 148                         Cazorla 165                         Nasri 162

AM         Rameriz 142                        McGready 144                   Walcott 159                        Navas 160

ST           Lambert 142                       Lukaku 151                          Sanchez 162                       Argueo 180

TOTAL   1566                                       1664                                       1732                                       1782

In constructing the lineups for the current season, I had to adjust for the fact that we are no longer playing a 4231. 

Football Manager 2015 (These are the FM 2015 numbers for the post-transfer window teams.)

Pos         Southampton                    Everton                                Arsenal                 Man City

G             Forster 140                         Howard 153                        Szczensy 152                      Hart 158

LB           Bertrand 136                      Baines 159                           Gibbs 145                            Kolarov 146

CB           Alderweireld 143              Distin 138                             Mertesacker 159              Kompany 170

CB           Fonte 131                            Jagielka 155                        Koscielny 158                     Demakelis 149

RB           Clyne 137                             Coleman 149                      Debuchy 148                      Zabaleta 165

CM         Schneiderlin 145               Barry 151                             Cazola 163                           Toure 182

CM         Wanyama 144                    McCarthy 145                    Ramsey 160                     Fernandinho 157

C/AM    Davis 136                             Barkley 143                         Wilshire 150                        Silva 174

AM         Rodriguez 148                    Pienaar 145                         Ozil 171                                 Nasri 164

AM         Tadic 145                              Miralles 154                        Walcott 159                        Navas 160

ST           Pelle 140                              Lukaku 148                          Sanchez 162                       Argueo 180

TOTAL   1545                                       1640                                       1727                                       1805

There are several changes in how FM rates our players.  Betrand, for example, has become slightly worse by joining us.  Clyne has also gotten slightly worse since last year.  On the other hand, Rodriguez has gone up by 6 points and Pelle has gone up by 8 points.

FM’s conclusion, however, is that our starting 11 is 21 points worse than it was last year.  This is not a trivial difference.  It is about the equivalent of replacing one good player with a world class player.

Everton:  FM thinks Everton has gotten 24 points worse.  However, the difference there is explained almost entirely by Distin dropping from being a world class defender to merely an adequate defender.  This means, however, that we are pretty much just as close to catching up with Everton as we were before.

Arsenal:  Arsenal has dropped just 5 points.  However, this is misleading because Arsenal has a bunch of players who don’t fit into their best eleven because of their position, but who have higher scores than some of the players in the best eleven.  Welbeck and Giroud, for example, are 154 and 153 respectively.  In other words, Arsenal has a lot more depth than either Southampton or Everton.  Chambers was a 126 for us, but is now 133.  He has also progressed from having no significant ability to play center back to being very, very good at it.

Manchester City:  FM has Manchester City being significantly improved, which is only to be expected following their championship season.  However, it certainly appears to overrate them right now.  Yaya Toure’s 182 is a real anomaly.  This shouldn’t be a surprise though.  He is 31 years old and has had a bad year personally—a significant drop off in performance should be expected.  Maybe City should sold him in the summer like he asked.

Southampton will have great difficulty catching up with these teams’ FM CA scores.  To catch Everton we need to add 95 points of CA; Arsenal requires 182 CA; and, Manchester City requires 260 CA.  That kind of improvement through the transfer market is simply not possible on our budget.  For comparison purposes, West Ham is 37 points behind us. Swansea is 14 points behind us.  Burnley is 140 points behind us. In other words, FM believes Burnley is closer to catching us than we are to catching Manchester City.

On the other hand, it is pretty clear that, as of now, Southampton is playing far better than the FM 2015 database would permit.  After all, according to FM the only Southampton players good enough to start for Everton are Alderweireld, Rodriguez, and Schneiderlin.  And Schneiderlin would push Barkley out of the starting lineup which is not what would really happen.

Thus, our improvement would have to come through efforts that are not measurable in FM teams—at least not right away.  If we keep playing like this through the January transfer window, the final FM 2015 database will undoubtedly award many of our players much higher ratings.

As for me, this means a couple of things: first, while I will still use the FM data base for blog articles, I will be taking it with even more grains of salt than before; and, second, it is probably just as well that I am so busy with work that I will not have time to start a FM save right now.  It would be too discouraging since I would inevitably far underperform real life.