News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


You know why Premier sides want to sign Bryan?

Started by Spirit of 2000, January 15, 2020, 01:22:05 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

fulhamfan


junior white

If Bryan were to leave we should look at Harry Toffolo of Lincoln

toshes mate

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 11:48:59 AM
An algorithm is a process to solve a problem, we are in the Championship and if we do nothing will probably stay here. If you consider staying in the Championship a problem, then any process to solve that problem is an algorithm. And, obviously an algorithm that fixes promotion players, new player and coaching would be ideal.
Each algorithm comes from having solved a problem at least once and that may or may not mean you will have covered every eventuality in finding the solution.  Algorithms have precise rules so please tell me what might or may be one precise rule about getting FFC into the PL?


The Rational Fan

#23
Quote from: toshes mate on January 15, 2020, 01:23:55 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 11:48:59 AM
An algorithm is a process to solve a problem, we are in the Championship and if we do nothing will probably stay here. If you consider staying in the Championship a problem, then any process to solve that problem is an algorithm. And, obviously an algorithm that fixes promotion players, new player and coaching would be ideal.
Each algorithm comes from having solved a problem at least once and that may or may not mean you will have covered every eventuality in finding the solution.  Algorithms have precise rules so please tell me what might or may be one precise rule about getting FFC into the PL?

One rule, based on the ultimate yo-yo team WBA 2001–2010 that got promoted 4x, is "when relegated build on last seasons' cohesion rather than cleaning out the squad getting rid of deadwood and bringing in new players starting cohesion from scratch again". When WBA went up they never invested so heavily that they expected to stay up, they improved their squad in the long-term so that when they went down there squad was better equipped to get promoted from the Championship again.

Related to this rule, when in the Premier League Fulham should always have XI players in the squad that will stay in the squad in the Championship if we go down without requiring too many reinforcements in the summer transfer window. I think we didn't have enough quality forwards last season to bring down with us into the championship causing FFC to bring in a little too much new talent upfront (including Knockaert, Reid & Cav).

Similarly, we should get the XI for next season in the championship now, particularly we may need a right-winger if are not going to sign Knockaert.

toshes mate

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 01:42:53 PM
One rule, based on the ultimate yo-yo team WBA 2001–2010 that got promoted 4x, is "when relegated build on last seasons' cohesion rather than cleaning out the squad getting rid of deadwood and bringing in new players starting cohesion from scratch again". When WBA went up they never invested so heavily that they expected to stay up, they improved their squad in the long-term so that when they went down there squad was better equipped to get promoted from the Championship again. [snipped for brevity sake]
I am struggling to find a single rule (let alone a precise one) in that lot, and so I guess you haven't, as yet, got even the beginnings of an algorithm to solve FFC's plight.  But fear not because I don't think there is an algorithm in existence that would even begin to explain football's way of life.  My evidence is that, if there was such an algorithm it would have been committed to paper a long time ago.  Of course there would also have been an algorithm for how to beat the algorithm ... 

The Rational Fan

#25
Quote from: toshes mate on January 15, 2020, 02:31:14 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 01:42:53 PM
One rule, based on the ultimate yo-yo team WBA 2001–2010 that got promoted 4x, is "when relegated build on last seasons' cohesion rather than cleaning out the squad getting rid of deadwood and bringing in new players starting cohesion from scratch again". When WBA went up they never invested so heavily that they expected to stay up, they improved their squad in the long-term so that when they went down there squad was better equipped to get promoted from the Championship again. [snipped for brevity sake]
I am struggling to find a single rule (let alone a precise one) in that lot, and so I guess you haven't, as yet, got even the beginnings of an algorithm to solve FFC's plight.  But fear not because I don't think there is an algorithm in existence that would even begin to explain football's way of life.  My evidence is that, if there was such an algorithm it would have been committed to paper a long time ago.  Of course there would also have been an algorithm for how to beat the algorithm ...

An algorithm is a process followed to attempt to solve a problem, for example a brain follows a process to solve a problem. The fact that one cannot write it down doesn't prove it there is not an algorithm, it only shows that the person is not self-aware of the algorithm they use and not aware how their brain solves problems.


Dr Quinzel

Quote from: Spirit of 2000 on January 15, 2020, 01:22:05 AM
Because he's an excellent wingback with superb delivery and is being mis-used by Parker who he's notably regressed under. Premiership sides will work out how to use him effectively going forward and cover him defensively.

How would you quantify that based on last season and not being that good under the other managers?

Not here to rip into him, although personally I don't think he's great, but not sure he's what you describe either?

Dr Quinzel

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 02:41:01 PM
Quote from: toshes mate on January 15, 2020, 02:31:14 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 01:42:53 PM
One rule, based on the ultimate yo-yo team WBA 2001–2010 that got promoted 4x, is "when relegated build on last seasons' cohesion rather than cleaning out the squad getting rid of deadwood and bringing in new players starting cohesion from scratch again". When WBA went up they never invested so heavily that they expected to stay up, they improved their squad in the long-term so that when they went down there squad was better equipped to get promoted from the Championship again. [snipped for brevity sake]
I am struggling to find a single rule (let alone a precise one) in that lot, and so I guess you haven't, as yet, got even the beginnings of an algorithm to solve FFC's plight.  But fear not because I don't think there is an algorithm in existence that would even begin to explain football's way of life.  My evidence is that, if there was such an algorithm it would have been committed to paper a long time ago.  Of course there would also have been an algorithm for how to beat the algorithm ...

An algorithm is a process followed to attempt to solve a problem, for example a brain follows a process to solve a problem. The fact that one cannot write it down doesn't prove it there is not an algorithm, it only shows that the person is not self-aware of the algorithm they use and not aware how their brain solves problems.

Come on, that's tit for tat. No need to be deliberately obtuse. You know what he meant.

Logicalman

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 11:48:59 AM
An algorithm is a process to solve a problem, we are in the Championship and if we do nothing will probably stay here. If you consider staying in the Championship a problem, then any process to solve that problem is an algorithm. And, obviously an algorithm that fixes promotion players, new player and coaching would be ideal.

I think you might be using the term algorithm in it's widest possible manner when applying it to human decision-making techniques based on facts as well as assumptions.
In it's more daily use, the term algorithm is applied to a set of known inputs applied to provide or produce a desired result.
The difference here is that player stats are fact-based, whereas assumptions are often subjective-based, and when you mix the two together you are then creating an algorithm out of a hybrid mix of which you cannot be certain the inputs are always known. It would be similar to using a RAND operation in an algorithm and expecting the results to be the same each time, which they likely would not be, based on the RAND seed being the subjective input.
Logical is just in the name - don't expect it has anything to do with my thought process, because I AM the man who sold the world.


toshes mate

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 15, 2020, 02:41:01 PM
An algorithm is a process followed to attempt to solve a problem. The fact that one cannot write it down doesn't prove it there is not an algorithm and even other coaches did "design new algorithms to beat his algorithm"  .
An algorithm is a precise rule (or set of rules) on how to solve a problem (definition).
The process is to precisely follow the algorithm which has been written to solve a precise problem.  Use the wrong algorithm and you are sunk without trace.
If you cannot precisely define your problem at the beginning of an algorithm then you are never going to start the process.
It isn't a chicken and egg situation.  Algorithms are a series of very precise rules for a particular circumstance e.g. is the flower yellow, how many petals etc.  Precision in everything.

toshes mate

Algorithms have existed for thousand of years, found on Babylonian clay tablets, and in Persian astronomical and mathematical writings. They also existed in China. It is very difficult to know when they may first have started but what they have in common is that they state practical rules that are still true now.  Pythagoras solved the length of the sides of a right angled triangle with his.   

H4usuallysitting

Ultimately, he's a commodity....if we can make substantial profit on that commodity, and the commodity want's to go - then he's off.....pounds, shilling's and pence.....


Statto

#32
I agree with The Rational Fan. It's football we're talking about here, a relatively straightforward concept of pushing a spherical physical object through a rectangle. Any aspect of that can potentially be quantified, analysed using stats or solved with an algorithm. Such algorithms may be too lengthy or complex for a person to comprehend, and way too complex to write down in a post on an internet forum, but as TRF says that doesn't mean they don't exist.

However it may mean the likes of TK are never going to work them out and that they should therefore stick to old fashioned methods.

toshes mate

Statto (and therefore TRF) may be right, at least theoretically, since, strangely enough, there are competitions for the most complex algorithms ever written, held regularly, like the Olympics. 

It is normally reserved for computer programmers but some mathematicians also participate.  It is there to prove nothing is beyond the algorithm.

The competition has yielded many interesting complexities (if you like that sort of thing) but very few certainties because proofs are equally complicated.

There has been a long term race to find a pattern in Pi which is now heading towards many, many millions of decimal places without success.  There is also no success for algorithms designed to prove probability theorems involving simple things like a coin toss, because certainty always has a weak spot called uncertainty and vice versa.

Could someone write a paper on how to get the best out of Joe Bryan, algorithm style? How would you test its efficacy, since there is only one Joe Bryan, at FFC at least, and he may have changed by virtue of all the interest paid to him, rather than any of the stuff contained in the algorithm?  Would it not be easier to look for a simpler solution?   

colinwhite

lets just blame Parker or the director of football !


Logicalman

Quote from: colinwhite on January 15, 2020, 05:24:48 PM
lets just blame Parker or the director of football !

I feel ya, Is there an algorithm to determine exasperation?   :005:
Logical is just in the name - don't expect it has anything to do with my thought process, because I AM the man who sold the world.

The Rational Fan

#36
Quote from: Statto on January 15, 2020, 03:51:46 PM
Any aspect of that can potentially be quantified, analysed using stats or solved with an algorithm. Such algorithms may be too lengthy or complex for a person to comprehend, and way too complex to write down in a post on an internet forum, but as TRF says that doesn't mean they don't exist. However it may mean the likes of TK are never going to work them out and that they should therefore stick to old fashioned methods.

From the accounts, we know that the DOF needed massive investment from the owner to buy players in the summer transfer window of 2018 without that the squad would have been very thin.  How do we know this? In the past, accounts show that Shahid Khan has only invested money into the club when the equity is getting low enough to affect FFP. Therefore, we know SK only invests when the club needs the money to proceed with its next purchase, and he typically only gives enough money to cover the cost for the first year. 

We also know that Shahid Khan invested £29.3 million on the 29th July 2018. After the 29th July 2018, Tony Khan bought i) Mitrovoic costing £7.4m per year (£22m over 5 years plus £3.0m per year wages), ii) Mawson costing ~£5.5m per year, iii) Bryan costing ~£3.5m per year, iv) Anguissa costing £7.6m per year, and v) Rico and others costing the remaining £5.5m per year. Without Shahid Khan backing the DOF on the 29th July 2018 with £29.3 million, I cannot see how he could have afforded players (Mitro, Mawson, Anguissa, Bryan & Rico) costing £29.3 million in their first season.

Without Shahid Khan's investment, any DOF would have only had enough money to get: Betts, Fabri, Rodak, Christie, TFM, Chambers, Djaló, Ream, MLM, Odoi, Cisse, KMac, Stefjo, Seri, Cairney, Ayite, Schürrle, Kamara, Vietto, Fonte, Kebano and R.Sessegnon. I am certain another DOF may have invested wiser than Tony Khan, but without the £29.3m  most DOFs would end up with a fair worse squad than Tony Khan ended up with.

I know many believe that Shahid Khan would have backed any DOF the full £29.3m after promotion like he did for his son, but I don't, if it took Tony Khan until the 29th July 2018 to convince his own father to give him family money, then I think other DOF would have found it harder and possibly not got as much.

As for trying old fashion methods, it may be the best way to invest in players, but you have a major problem, which is any investor believes that "doing the same thing and expecting a different result is insanity". MAF investment in Fulham was nice for fans, but completely failed financially look at the accounts, he would have made more money using the grass to feed cows on Craven Cottage. Old fashion methods don't work anymore than new methods, all money invested will be reinvested until its lost, the only difference is old methods typically fail a little slower and new methods have the dream that the next algorithm may transform the club permanently (e.g. like Leicester's transformation).

A summary of Fulham's old fashion methods were, MAF invested into i) Paul Bracewell until his investments failed, then ii) Jean Tigana whose investments succeeded at first but player turnover was too high and we weren't making Champions League anytime soon, then iii) Chris Coleman etc etc. While many of these were successfully for fans none really produced the results expected financial because we invested to be the ManUtd of the South but none of the managers delivered and every time one manager failed MAF would believe in a new manager that also fails financially. MAF lost his belief in all managers, because time and time again they failed, the Khans took over and believe that they can find a way to be successful using new methods.

Shahid Khan needs a vision and plan he believes, otherwise, he won't invest. Tony Khan provides that vision which involves using statistics and algorithms for recruitment. Tony Khan works out an algorithm that he thinks should work, gets money from the owner, invests in the players the algorithm recommends and sees the results. If the algorithm doesn't work (like in 2018/19), then Tony Khan finds a new algorithm, promises things will be different this time, get new investment and repeats the process. The cycle will repeat as long as Shahid Khan doesn't realize the all methods won't work, like Newcastle and Sunderland owners have realized. As fans what we don't want is the owner realizes new methods don't work and then stops investing, EPL tv money will stop and we'll be depending on gate receipts to fund players.

toshes mate

Quote from: The Rational Fan on January 16, 2020, 01:09:38 AM
As for trying old fashion methods, it may be the best way to invest in players, but you have a major problem, which is any investor believes that "doing the same thing and expecting a different result is insanity".
I hope you see the irony in this quote about doing the same thing when you talk about algorithms.  The software and functions used in spreadsheets, stock market analysis, the weather forecasts, betting markets are basically 'all doing the same thing without mistakes' whereas human beings always make mistakes either accidently on purpose, a rush of adrenaline, a touch of panic, a moment of inspiration or just plain madness that often makes a big difference to everything - think Newton and falling apples.   


Dr Quinzel

It was always worries me when I read concerns that only TK could get the money needed (and it is) from SK. Not that opinion or the holding of that opinion, but just the idea in general. I don't like to think that it is true as it worries me re the motivations of the owner. And yes, I know I'll have the Riverside thrown back at me as evidence, but it doesn't stop the concern!

ALG01

IMO Bryan is OK going forward and I would be happy with that but he is not a good defender, or not good enough. Last season i was told the Prem was an issue and the back four were never up to it. But over and over he got caught in no mans land and didn't know when to back off and when to close down, he was a large part of the problem as opposition teams target him.
I was adbvised the championship would be a better test, but he rmains just as poor defensively and continually gets caught out of position, not because he was way up the pitch, which I do ot mind, but because he has no idea when to close and when to back off so consequently wingers have a field day against him.

I thought he was a downgrade on what we had and I have seen nothing this season to make me change my mind, he is just OK nothing special, his distribution is not all that either.