League 1 Table

[Campsall rover]

There is a 40 point difference from 6th place to 21st with 1 game to play

Can’t remember anything remotely like that ever previously.

80 points or more required to get in to the play offs. When has that ever happened?

[DRCraig]

Normally 72 points for the play offs

[Campsall rover]

Normally 72 points for the play offs

Ave is 73/74 I would think Craig. But yes 72 is sometimes enough, even 70

[turnbull for england]

As the points have to come from somewhere, it begs the question are the top teams better than usual or the bottom teams worse?

[DRCraig]

Think Crewe have been really poor. I believe their fans and reporter on radio Stoke fear they could go down again next season.

[Campsall rover]

As the points have to come from somewhere, it begs the question are the top teams better than usual or the bottom teams worse?

Both imo. The league table does not lie.

[Colemans Left Hook]

As the points have to come from somewhere, it begs the question are the top teams better than usual or the bottom teams worse?

f-f-s we all knew what was going to happen this year Ipswich ( spent two fortunes and got nowhere -  and you think we signed bad players ) were going to win it Wigan 2nd etc etc   

apart from Plymouth not getting relegated and becoming dark horses and Charlton bombing it the top 9 or ten are where they should be miles better than the rest ( got a funny feeling money has something to do with it and for a harder prediction than that i predict tomorrow will be Wednesday - not 100% sure about that though)

[Sammy Chung was King]

Money doesn’t always guarantee success but it helps. You need a manager that won’t waste the funding.

[GazLaz]

Money doesn’t always guarantee success but it helps. You need a manager that won’t waste the funding.

Money doesn’t buy success but the teams with the top 12 budgets in L1 are placed 1-12.

[drfchound]

We should have been 14th then.

[Campsall rover]

Money doesn’t always guarantee success but it helps. You need a manager that won’t waste the funding.

Money doesn’t buy success but the teams with the top 12 budgets in L1 are placed 1-12.

Not quite. Accrington will be the 24th and they are in top 12.

Sorry incorrect they are 13th in the table.

Wycombe have over achieved as they will maybe just top 12 budget but possibly not. I would guess 13th or 15th based on ours supposedly 14th.

[RoversAlias]

One season in the Championship has made a difference to Wycombe's capabilities. Sam Vokes didn't come cheap.

[Campsall rover]

One season in the Championship has made a difference to Wycombe's capabilities. Sam Vokes didn't come cheap.

No he won’t have but I will be surprised if their overall budget is much more than ours.
Their gates ave around 5.000
They are not a wealthy club by any means.

[idler]

Having a manager that’s been in place for some time and a settled side probably helped a lot.

[Campsall rover]

So if both Fleetwood and Gillingham lose on Saturday 40 points is going to keep Fleetwood up on goal difference.
So the question, is 40 points for the team finishing in 20th place and staying up the lowest ever in a 46 game season under 3 points for a win.

One for Dutch Uncle I think. BST maybe you know. Or anyone of course.

40 points if it turns out to be 40 on Saturday is even lower than any of us were predicting.
The bottom 6 could all be on 42 points or lower. That is quite remarkable.
How we have managed to not be good enough to stay up this season is crazy.
I suppose the other 3 relegated clubs and supporters will be saying the same.

[Sammy Chung was King]

Money doesn’t always guarantee success but it helps. You need a manager that won’t waste the funding.

Money doesn’t buy success but the teams with the top 12 budgets in L1 are placed 1-12.

It doesn’t happen every year though, mate. We haven’t had the budget nor manager this season-a bad combination.

[Upton Rover]

To many poor teams down at the bottom, and it goes to show that if we had recruited a proper manager in the first place either before Wellens or after Wellens we would have stayed up that’s a FACT instead we recruited out of the boards heart and gave it to another member of staff and the ship sunk, you can’t defend this Campsall

[Campsall rover]

To many poor teams down at the bottom, and it goes to show that if we had recruited a proper manager in the first place either before Wellens or after Wellens we would have stayed up that’s a FACT instead we recruited out of the boards heart and gave it to another member of staff and the ship sunk, you can’t defend this Campsall

Please tell me what I have defended.
You obviously have not read my posts this season. I suggest you do. 

[Dutch Uncle]

So if both Fleetwood and Gillingham lose on Saturday 40 points is going to keep Fleetwood up on goal difference.
So the question, is 40 points for the team finishing in 20th place and staying up the lowest ever in a 46 game season under 3 points for a win.

One for Dutch Uncle I think. BST maybe you know. Or anyone of course.

40 points if it turns out to be 40 on Saturday is even lower than any of us were predicting.
The bottom 6 could all be on 42 points or lower. That is quite remarkable.
How we have managed to not be good enough to stay up this season is crazy.
I suppose the other 3 relegated clubs and supporters will be saying the same.

Posted elsewhere a while ago - since 3 points per win was introduced in 1981-82 the lowest number ever to survive in the Division is 45 in 1999-00 and the lowest number of points in 21st place is 43 in 2011-12 so 44 could have survived that season.

Those points have to go somewhere. The highest number of points finishing 7th and missing out on a playoff place was 80 in the same season 1999-2000. 81 would also have missed out because 6th place had 82 points

The corollary of those two bits of data is that the previous record for difference of points between 7th and 20th , two teams that will play each other again the next season, is 35 in 1999-00. That will be easily beaten this season
 

[Campsall rover]

So if both Fleetwood and Gillingham lose on Saturday 40 points is going to keep Fleetwood up on goal difference.
So the question, is 40 points for the team finishing in 20th place and staying up the lowest ever in a 46 game season under 3 points for a win.

One for Dutch Uncle I think. BST maybe you know. Or anyone of course.

40 points if it turns out to be 40 on Saturday is even lower than any of us were predicting.
The bottom 6 could all be on 42 points or lower. That is quite remarkable.
How we have managed to not be good enough to stay up this season is crazy.
I suppose the other 3 relegated clubs and supporters will be saying the same.

Posted elsewhere a while ago - since 3 points per win was introduced in 1981-82 the lowest number ever to survive in the Division is 45 in 1999-00 and the lowest number of points in 21st place is 43 in 2011-12 so 44 could have survived that season.

Those points have to go somewhere. The highest number of points finishing 7th and missing out on a playoff place was 80 in the same season 1999-2000. 81 would also have missed out because 6th place had 82 points

The corollary of those two bits of data is that the previous record for difference of points between 7th and 20th , two teams that will play each other again the next season, is 35 in 1999-00. That will be easily beaten this season

Thanks DU
New you would come up with the info.   

[Campsall rover]

Think Crewe have been really poor. I believe their fans and reporter on radio Stoke fear they could go down again next season.

Sounds like some of our fans then. 

No I think we will be challenging at the right end of the league.

[RoversAlias]

One season in the Championship has made a difference to Wycombe's capabilities. Sam Vokes didn't come cheap.

No he won’t have but I will be surprised if their overall budget is much more than ours.
Their gates ave around 5.000
They are not a wealthy club by any means.

As I say, spending one season in the Championship has made a big difference. I could have told you Wycombe would finish well clear of us before a ball was kicked this season.

They kept most of their squad from last season and signed Vokes and Josh Scowen in the summer, players we couldn't have feasibly signed, and the consistency in management and ownership will have helped too.

We can't think of them as little Wycombe anymore, the Championship is a different beast to the one Rovers last played in.

[Campsall rover]

Wycombe are a great example of how a smaller club can be successful.

They are a well run club who have kept the same manager for many years and have that consistency about the way they run the club.

I don’t like the way they play football particularly. They push the rules to the absolute limit of boundaries, with play acting, time wasting etc. This will continue by them and other teams until referees stamp it out.

Having said that I admire what they have achieved as a club of their size.

[DonnyNoel]

Wycombe are a great example of how a smaller club can be successful.

They are a well run club who have kept the same manager for many years and have that consistency about the way they run the club.

I don’t like the way they play football particularly. They push the rules to the absolute limit of boundaries, with play acting, time wasting etc. This will continue by them and other teams until referees stamp it out.

Having said that I admire what they have achieved as a club of their size.

I think the same about Rotherham, not necessarily size, but consistent in the way they're run and a long term tactical and recruitment consistency.

In both cases though, I wonder if Ainsworth or Warne have ever been approached for a bigger Championship role? Have they turned down approaches? Do clubs not approach them as they think their style might not work at another club? Has the "industrial" style of play gone against them?