Doldrums

[Suttonian]

There were two division 3's, north and south, for over 20 years which is probably why we come out as 11th. Like I say there wasn't 92 league teams until 1950 and only 22 teams in each division

So I suspect you can only really look at our record, in terms of our position from 1-92, from when we became 4 Divisions comprising 92 clubs. Anyone got those stats? My money is on mid-table League 2

That happened in 1958 and earlier on in the thread Tippy Tappy Football counted 1 season in div 2, 22 seasons in div 3, 37 seasons in div 4. He didn't work out the league positions though.

That ignores 70 years of total league history and 27 years of Mansfield's league history though (take 7 years off for the war years). Could be seen as altering the facts to suit the argument, or could be seen as an extra 27 years as a member of the lowest division in the league during that format. During division 3 north & south half the teams in the league would have been in the lowest division every season. It's still an extra 20 years in division 3 not taken into account

http://www.englishfootballstats.co.uk/C ... ldtown.htm

Average league position since 1958 when the league went to 4 divisions is 71, or 3rd in league 2. I think we would all accept that at the end of the season
The years when teams like Accrington, Aldershot, Bury and Macclesfield went bust the season would have ended with 91 teams

[Marky Mark]

There were two division 3's, north and south, for over 20 years which is probably why we come out as 11th. Like I say there wasn't 92 league teams until 1950 and only 22 teams in each division

So I suspect you can only really look at our record, in terms of our position from 1-92, from when we became 4 Divisions comprising 92 clubs. Anyone got those stats? My money is on mid-table League 2

That happened in 1958 and earlier on in the thread Tippy Tappy Football counted 1 season in div 2, 22 seasons in div 3, 37 seasons in div 4. He didn't work out the league positions though.

That ignores 70 years of total league history and 27 years of Mansfield's league history though (take 7 years off for the war years). Could be seen as altering the facts to suit the argument, or could be seen as an extra 27 years as a member of the lowest division in the league during that format. During division 3 north & south half the teams in the league would have been in the lowest division every season. It's still an extra 20 years in division 3 not taken into account

http://www.englishfootballstats.co.uk/C ... ldtown.htm

Average league position since 1958 when the league went to 4 divisions is 71, or 3rd in league 2. I think we would all accept that at the end of the season

Dont you go ending this bloody thread as I've been poring over Jack Retter's book for the last hour, working out our positions in a combined Div 3 North and South league between 1932 and 1958 and upweighting it to represent 92 clubs instead of the 88 in those days (87 in 1931/32 due to Wigan Borough resigning from the league on October 21st 1931)

[Suttonian]

You don't need to upweight it. Where we finished is our league position wether 88, 92 or 91 clubs. Can only play what is in front of you - in 91/92 we would still have finished 3rd even if Aldershot hadn't gone bust and expunged 6 PTS from our record and the league finished with 91 clubs. It's still finishing 71st that season

[Suttonian]

You can do all you want with these stats but at the end of the day, they are all flawed in one way or another and are therefore unreliable. That’s not even mentioning that they fail to address any type of financial investment into any of the participants and the impact that investment has.

What actually matters is the recent amount of investment in the squad and structure of our club and where we are in comparison to that. Anyone who thinks we are not at least several years behind where we should be is simply wrong.

It’s hardly surprising people are becoming frustrated and are questioning the direction of travel. I do believe we will get there eventually but can’t believe all of the effort is floundering because an obvious problem is not being addressed for whatever reason. I can accept going without another striker but cannot accept we don’t need at least one more centre half.

I agree with what you're saying overall

Regarding the bit I highlighted, if Haslam hadn't spent 15 years running everything about our club into the ground maybe we would have had a better squad/infrastructure and JR and SH wouldn't have had to start building from next to nothing. That probably put us 20 years behind and we're only now catching up

[NEStag]

You don't need to upweight it. Where we finished is our league position wether 88, 92 or 91 clubs. Can only play what is in front of you - in 91/92 we would still have finished 3rd even if Aldershot hadn't gone bust and expunged 6 PTS from our record and the league finished with 91 clubs. It's still finishing 71st that season

If you want to do something representative then you could create a percentage position (place/number of teams). You'd then have to treat the non-league years as over 100, unless you are ignoring them.

[Sandy Pate Best Stag]

You can do all you want with these stats but at the end of the day, they are all flawed in one way or another and are therefore unreliable. That’s not even mentioning that they fail to address any type of financial investment into any of the participants and the impact that investment has.

What actually matters is the recent amount of investment in the squad and structure of our club and where we are in comparison to that. Anyone who thinks we are not at least several years behind where we should be is simply wrong.

It’s hardly surprising people are becoming frustrated and are questioning the direction of travel. I do believe we will get there eventually but can’t believe all of the effort is floundering because an obvious problem is not being addressed for whatever reason. I can accept going without another striker but cannot accept we don’t need at least one more centre half.

I agree with what you're saying overall

Regarding the bit I highlighted, if Haslam hadn't spent 15 years running everything about our club into the ground maybe we would have had a better squad/infrastructure and JR and SH wouldn't have had to start building from next to nothing. That probably put us 20 years behind and we're only now catching up

There was plenty of decay in the club before Haslam (not that I’m saying he was innocent) and that’s why he was able to buy it for a pound. Ironically you could say the club progressed under his stewardship as we had a new (if not perfect) ground built. I suppose that just shows how facts can be twisted to reflect viewpoints and shows it’s not just statistics that are controversial.

I think you can only judge a club by its relatively recent history, as our bed wetting neighbours are finding out and I just feel we are currently better than our league position and should be ambitious to achieve that elevated reality.

[Suttonian]

You don't need to upweight it. Where we finished is our league position wether 88, 92 or 91 clubs. Can only play what is in front of you - in 91/92 we would still have finished 3rd even if Aldershot hadn't gone bust and expunged 6 PTS from our record and the league finished with 91 clubs. It's still finishing 71st that season

If you want to do something representative then you could create a percentage position (place/number of teams). You'd then have to treat the non-league years as over 100, unless you are ignoring them.

You could do a percentage representation but I'm not a statistician I've only got an O level in maths from 40 years ago and CBA. As it would be for league position only I would ignore the non league years. If you included the division 3 N & S years would it be out of 66 teams instead of 88 though? Both divisions were equal and ran side by side

[NEStag]

You don't need to upweight it. Where we finished is our league position wether 88, 92 or 91 clubs. Can only play what is in front of you - in 91/92 we would still have finished 3rd even if Aldershot hadn't gone bust and expunged 6 PTS from our record and the league finished with 91 clubs. It's still finishing 71st that season

If you want to do something representative then you could create a percentage position (place/number of teams). You'd then have to treat the non-league years as over 100, unless you are ignoring them.

You could do a percentage representation but I'm not a statistician I've only got an O level in maths from 40 years ago and CBA. As it would be for league position only I would ignore the non league years. If you included the division 3 N & S years would it be out of 66 teams instead of 88 though? Both divisions were equal and ran side by side

It would have to be out of 66.

[Suttonian]

It would have to be out of 66.

If it's the Football League only the Premier League is a separate FA competition for the last 30 years so it would be out of 70 clubs from '92 to '95, and 72 clubs '95 to now.
Should significantly improve our final position

[Marky Mark]

I've worked out the league position relative to a consistent 92 clubs being in the league since 1931, that means that for seasons that there weren't 92 clubs then there has been a factor added to it so that there is a common denominator. For the years that there were two 3rd Divisions I've worked out what the place would be in a combined table.

The data and graph is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ue&sd=true

It wont be a surprise that the point in time where our average was highest was the late 70s when it was 66th place (2nd bottom of League One), it has hovered around the early 70's since then, and is now 73rd, so 5th in League Two. This is the lowest it's been since 1949/50. So our long term established position is between 2nd bottom of League One and 5th in League Two. If a flat number of teams in the league were used (ie, not accounting for seasons when there weren't 92 clubs), then our position would be half a place higher.

[bear 73]

I have read with interest your posts and the improvements made by the club, being a fresh face i look back over the seasons from 1993 all been spent in league 2 or lower.- non-leage.
So i can see the frustration and the desire for league 1 football, its like the holy grail.
Getting there is one phase staying there another 50% are no better than top 10 league 2 teams.
Outside the one call there is a lot of unrest mainly on social media and it thriwe heldves when the team are having a bad spell.
If clubs like, Sheff Wed-Derby County and more struggle with multi million pound owners then Mansfield have to be prudent and build for a better future.
David Sharpe knows how to run a football club and states Mansfield Town has potencial from keeping the club in the football league finishing 16th
The following season despite the wonderful time social media had after a horrific start to the campaign their was a day out at Wembley all beit a bad one.
Now we enter a new season losing our 1st match away, and already the knives are out nobody at the club has a clue.
Many outside The One Call would like the bulldozer in and remove all the building blocks put in place.
According to some we spent millions on the team and should walk the league,
Where do they get this information 1992 was the last time in league 1, its just propaganda to stir the fans.
£150-000 is our highest transfer fee, Mansfield Town is a viable club with owners who only wish the best for the club.
A C-E-O in David Sharpe who knows his stuff, and a Manager who knows about building blocks. and puts the club first.
Its a journey started from 16th to Wembley and like has been said we want this club to be challenging for promotion
.every season and we will get there.
League 1 will hold no fears it has the biggest trap door but we will enter it in a position of Strength

[cassellswasmagic]

I wouldn’t say the knives are out Bear Just because a few dozen folk on here or Facebook or whatever other platforms there is, throw huge wobblies, I think 99% of us fans see it, as it is, an opening day loss. That’s all it is. We should win on Saturday and all will be well again. The club is in the safest hands, all over, in our history!!!

[Suttonian]

I have read with interest your posts and the improvements made by the club, being a fresh face i look back over the seasons from 1993 all been spent in league 2 or lower.- non-leage.
So i can see the frustration and the desire for league 1 football, its like the holy grail.
Getting there is one phase staying there another 50% are no better than top 10 league 2 teams.
Outside the one call there is a lot of unrest mainly on social media and it thriwe heldves when the team are having a bad spell.
If clubs like, Sheff Wed-Derby County and more struggle with multi million pound owners then Mansfield have to be prudent and build for a better future.
David Sharpe knows how to run a football club and states Mansfield Town has potencial from keeping the club in the football league finishing 16th
The following season despite the wonderful time social media had after a horrific start to the campaign their was a day out at Wembley all beit a bad one.
Now we enter a new season losing our 1st match away, and already the knives are out nobody at the club has a clue.
Many outside The One Call would like the bulldozer in and remove all the building blocks put in place.
According to some we spent millions on the team and should walk the league,
Where do they get this information 1992 was the last time in league 1, its just propaganda to stir the fans.
£150-000 is our highest transfer fee, Mansfield Town is a viable club with owners who only wish the best for the club.
A C-E-O in David Sharpe who knows his stuff, and a Manager who knows about building blocks. and puts the club first.
Its a journey started from 16th to Wembley and like has been said we want this club to be challenging for promotion
.every season and we will get there.
League 1 will hold no fears it has the biggest trap door but we will enter it in a position of Strength

4 years in charge of Wigan ending in administration, a points deduction and relegation. Let's hope he's learnt his lesson, eh?

[Suttonian]

I've worked out the league position relative to a consistent 92 clubs being in the league since 1931, that means that for seasons that there weren't 92 clubs then there has been a factor added to it so that there is a common denominator. For the years that there were two 3rd Divisions I've worked out what the place would be in a combined table.

The data and graph is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ue&sd=true

It wont be a surprise that the point in time where our average was highest was the late 70s when it was 66th place (2nd bottom of League One), it has hovered around the early 70's since then, and is now 73rd, so 5th in League Two. This is the lowest it's been since 1949/50. So our long term established position is between 2nd bottom of League One and 5th in League Two. If a flat number of teams in the league were used (ie, not accounting for seasons when there weren't 92 clubs), then our position would be half a place higher.

Isn't that making numbers up for no reason?
Original 12 teams, 88 or 92 - doesn't change the position where teams finished at the end of the season

[Suttonian]

If some people got their wish and Bananarama became league 5 you'd have to do it all again for a 116 team league but would our league position still be 73

[NEStag]

I've worked out the league position relative to a consistent 92 clubs being in the league since 1931, that means that for seasons that there weren't 92 clubs then there has been a factor added to it so that there is a common denominator. For the years that there were two 3rd Divisions I've worked out what the place would be in a combined table.

The data and graph is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ue&sd=true

It wont be a surprise that the point in time where our average was highest was the late 70s when it was 66th place (2nd bottom of League One), it has hovered around the early 70's since then, and is now 73rd, so 5th in League Two. This is the lowest it's been since 1949/50. So our long term established position is between 2nd bottom of League One and 5th in League Two. If a flat number of teams in the league were used (ie, not accounting for seasons when there weren't 92 clubs), then our position would be half a place higher.

Thanks. Did you exclude the non-league years?

[gazza1988]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

[Marky Mark]

I've worked out the league position relative to a consistent 92 clubs being in the league since 1931, that means that for seasons that there weren't 92 clubs then there has been a factor added to it so that there is a common denominator. For the years that there were two 3rd Divisions I've worked out what the place would be in a combined table.

The data and graph is here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... ue&sd=true

It wont be a surprise that the point in time where our average was highest was the late 70s when it was 66th place (2nd bottom of League One), it has hovered around the early 70's since then, and is now 73rd, so 5th in League Two. This is the lowest it's been since 1949/50. So our long term established position is between 2nd bottom of League One and 5th in League Two. If a flat number of teams in the league were used (ie, not accounting for seasons when there weren't 92 clubs), then our position would be half a place higher.

Isn't that making numbers up for no reason?
Original 12 teams, 88 or 92 - doesn't change the position where teams finished at the end of the season

It's to make it relative to the current league structure. If a team always finished last of an 88 team league and then the league turned into a 92 team league is their average position 88th out of 92 even though they've never finished 4th from bottom, or is it last? Otherwise you're giving credit for finishing higher when they couldn't do anything but. As it is, it doesn't make that much difference anyway - our average position when factoring up to 92 is 72.85, our average position when just using the number of teams in the league is 72.35, so a rounding place higher.

[Sandy Pate Best Stag]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

And that would give you our average position since 1981 and exclude our most successful period in our history.

An interesting debate but with no clear answer. If we cut back to the chase, surely the question should be, given the amount of investment during the JR period have Mansfield Town FC under or over achieved. I think we have actually under achieved but not for want of trying.

[NEStag]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

That's what I did Gazza last night. See my 10.48 on page 3.

I went back to 81/82 and went through the league tables for every year and listed our position.

(Although I went back for the last 40 years rather than thinking about 3 for a win).

Non-league was counted as (for example) 105 (if we finished 13th in the National League).

I then did the (mean) average to get to 81.5 for the last 40 years. (3260/40).

[NEStag]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

And that would give you our average position since 1981 and exclude our most successful period in our history.

An interesting debate but with no clear answer. If we cut back to the chase, surely the question should be, given the amount of investment during the JR period have Mansfield Town FC under or over achieved. I think we have actually under achieved but not for want of trying.

"Stagsnet".

[Marky Mark]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

That's what I did Gazza last night. See my 10.48 on page 3.

I went back to 81/82 and went through the league tables for every year and listed our position.

(Although I went back for the last 40 years rather than thinking about 3 for a win).

Non-league was counted as (for example) 105 (if we finished 13th in the National League).

I then did the (mean) average to get to 81.5 for the last 40 years. (3260/40).

Our average position up to 1980 is 66th (2nd from bottom of League One), average position from 1980 is 80th (mid-League Two)

[gazza1988]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

And that would give you our average position since 1981 and exclude our most successful period in our history.

An interesting debate but with no clear answer. If we cut back to the chase, surely the question should be, given the amount of investment during the JR period have Mansfield Town FC under or over achieved. I think we have actually under achieved but not for want of trying.

I feel the same way.

Bookies odds and various blogs are good indicator of achievement, they're an outside source looking objectively in. If we finish where they say we will then we've achieved expectation. Finish below that thenwe have under achieved, finish higher then we have over achieved.

What happened the 70s is frankly irrelevant. IMO it shouldn't matter one bit. It's like Forest and their Euro cup wins. Irrelevant.

There is no clear answer because it is an opinion. I've seen us in the conference more than I have in league 1. Since I was born (34 years ago) We have spent 5 years at league 1 level and 5 years at conference level and 24 years at league 2 level.

You've also got to take into account the investment of each club.

At the end of the day we've been one of the favourites for promotion for a while and still aren't there. We are not meeting expectations. That doesn't mean we go for a manager merry go round either.

[Amber Andy]

We went backwards under the two previous managers.

You can look as far back as you want, it's where you are now that counts.

One game in and we have a thread called "doldrums". Crazy.

[Suttonian]

Surely you would only go as far back as 1981 when 3 points for a win was introduced. Otherwise you're including positions we wouldn't have necessarily finished in had it been 3 points for a win like it is now.

What we need to do then would be write down every finish (1st in conference is 93rd, 3rd I'd 95th etc)

Then find the mean median and mode of those finishes and see where it puts us.

That's picking and choosing figures again. 2pts or 3pts for a win, 88 or 92 teams in the league. It was the same rules for every single team in the league at that particular time. Our average league position since 1931 is 67, since 1958 which Rob asked about it's 71.
Weighting the figures to make every season up to 92 Marky Mark managed to get our average position since 1931 up to 73 and surely you can see that is not right when 20 years in the top 66 teams in the league should bring the average down