BST points prediction thread…

[DonnyOsmond]

https://www.worldfootball.net/table_calculator/eng-league-two/

Predictor for anyone who fancies it.

[drfchound]

That looks like a bit of fun DO.

[dickos1]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

How is PPG table not relevant now but in your mind the league table right now is relevant ? Making it up as you go along for whatever suits

I spent all last season trying to explain to all you negative folk that the league table is irrelevant until the end of the season

And you’ve spent all this season saying “look at the league table”
“ we’re second” “we’re third” “we’re sixth” etc
Have you not?

No I haven’t!
If the league table wasn’t there for reference and a stranger came across this forum they would be convinced we were in a relegation battle and not sitting in 2nd place

[dickos1]

I’m of the opinion that 84 points will be enough to get an automatic place.

Me too,
Billy thinks 84 won’t get us even into 4th.

[dickos1]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

What on earth are you talking about?

It’s not difficult,
Points per game is irrelvent until everyone has played the same number of games.

[IDM]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

What on earth are you talking about?

It’s not difficult,
Points per game is irrelvent until everyone has played the same number of games.

Sorry that doesn’t make sense.

If all the teams have played the same amount of games, either during or at the end of the season, then the table itself is absolute and accurate.  Any extrapolation would leave clubs in the same positions.  So therefore ppg becomes pointless.

It is when teams have played a different amount of games that ppg helps to compare.  A team could have 2ppg but be quite a few places off top spot if they’ve had a few postponements and a cup run.   Of course, there is never a guarantee of ppg continuing the same for the rest of the season..

[Juddy]

Oh how I wish we had beaten Chessie and Grimsby !

[BillyStubbsTears]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

What on earth are you talking about?

It’s not difficult,
Points per game is irrelvent until everyone has played the same number of games.

Wgat a complete load of cack.

If you really believe this, your saying you'd rather have 50 points after 30 games than 49 points after 25.

[BillyStubbsTears]

You wanted it. Here it is. Although you probably won't like it....

Remember, to save a lot of very tiresome arguing again, this is NOT predicting who will finish where. It's predicting how many points each final position will end up with. Nothing magic about it, but with a couple of exceptions, it's generally getting the finishing points tallies right to within a couple or 3 points for 15 years now.

So, here's this evening's prediction.

1st place: 90
2nd 89
3rd 88
4th 85
5th 85
6th 82
7th 75
8th 70
9th 69
10th 65

Bit of a bugger if that's anywhere near. It means we'd need to win 10 of our final 13 to make the top 3.

88 points feels high for 3rd place, but there are a lot of teams with already slightly better ppg than us, and similar recent form. Personally, I think we are going to struggle to make the top 3, and this confirms it. We still don't and never have consistently looked like clearly one of the top three sides this season.

Interesting. Very surprised by the high predicted points totals for 2nd and 3rd. Looking at season-to-date PPG this was recently tracking at 81-83 points, so to see 86-88 is surprising, albeit I understand this methodology is probably more nuanced in taking into account recent form.

Not saying this prediction won’t be accurate, and not particularly disagreeing, but it did prompt me to dive a bit deeper.

For 2nd and 3rd place teams to reach 89 and 88 points respectively, of the realistic contenders, it would require the following teams to have the following PPG record between now and the end of the season. (BTW I know this model isn’t about individual teams, but individual teams do actually have to play out the real-life scenario, and below are the ones who are realistically the most likely to do it)

Rovers: 2.38 PPG for 89 points, 2.31 PPG for 88.
Wimbledon: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Notts County: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Bradford: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Port Vale: 2.26 PPG for 89, 2.2 PPG for 88.


The one thing that’s been nagging at me since reading this is, only Walsall so far this season have averaged 2 PPG or more over the season. The rest of the runners and riders have been much more inconsistent.

I think the “last 8 games PPG” might be skewing this a bit. Maybe this makes it more accurate, or maybe it makes it less accurate: https://www.soccerstats.com/table.asp?league=england4&tid=re (if the link doesn’t work, find “relative form” table)

Notts County, Bradford, Rovers and Port Vale are all over performing their season-to-date PPG in the last 8 games by between 20-34%. But 14-15 games is a big chunk of the season (30% ish) - have any of these teams shown so far that they are likely to not only sustain that over the last 13-15 games, but also combine this with the previous 8, so effectively keep up the sort of run required to get to 88-89 points over the course of 21-23 games? It would take ages to do the maths on that which I haven’t got time to do, but it feels unlikely because if they had it in them, we’d have more teams closer to Walsall’s current tally surely?

Maybe they will. Surely that would be quite unusual though because it would mean those teams being in better-than-title-form for nearly half a season, in what feels like a division full of competitive but quite inconsistent teams? It seems to me like there is a chance this will settle down and we might find that the 5 teams in contention for 2nd/3rd place (assuming Walsall are already in a strong enough position to be near-certs) will drop back towards something resembling their season-long PPG over the run-in.

Using season-to-date PPG model here’s the projection, ordered this time in terms of highest PPG, not the PPG of the teams that are currently there:

1st: 94.76 points (2.06 PPG)
2nd: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
3rd: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
4th: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
5th: 81.42 points (1.77 PPG)
6th: 80.6 points (1.76 PPG)

Soccer Stats “projected points” table, which takes into account the strength of run-in opponents and home/away records, predicts the following expected points, in order of most to least:
Walsall: 93.38
Wimbledon: 83.26
Port Vale: 82.98
Bradford: 81.55
Rovers: 80.54
Notts: 79.50

This isn’t a million miles away from the above season-to-date PPG projection.

There is also the run-in to take into account. Here’s the “Opponents remaining PPG” for us and the teams around us:
Wimbledon: 1.30
Port Vale: 1.30
Bradford: 1.36
Rovers: 1.36
Notts: 1.44

Again, really close, but suggests we have a similar difficulty run-in to Bradford, slightly easier than Notts County, and slightly more difficult than Vale and Wimbledon.

Whichever way you look at it, it looks like it’s going to be incredibly tight. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if 2nd and 3rd place are decided on the final day.

Great analysis pib and yes, I took find it hard to believe that a total as high as 88 will be required for 3rd spot.

But I've frequently thought "Yeah, THAT doesn't sound right" over the years when I've cracked out these predictions and more often than not found them to be actually quite close to the mark.

There's no saying they will be right this time and they aren't always. And in any case, they are rarely spot on - more an indication of a likely range as things currently look. So I'd read "88" as "Likely but not certain to be in the range 86-90"

You're right by the way that the high totals currently predicted are because several sides have been in excellent form recently (in terms of PPG over the past 10 games). Specifically, Bradford and Notts C, then slightly behind them us, PV and Wimbledon.

For what it's worth (and DON'T read the model like this) the predicted points total per side of you extrapolate current PPG through to the end of the season are:

1st place: 90 Walsall
2nd 89: Bradford
3rd 88 Notts C
4/5th 85 Donny/Wimbledon
6th 82 PV

Here's the thing though. That's not how it works. The idea is that the model reckons SOME team will end up in 2nd with 89, and one in 3rd with 88.

And yes, it's very unlikely that any specific one of the five teams in 2-6th place at the moment will get 89 points and finish second. Because that will take a hell of a run of form as you say. But it's less unlikely that ONE of thosr five will have that run. Similar argument for 88 points for 3rd place.

The limitations of the model are clear, and you correctly identified them. It depends on the assumption that on average (not for each team) current PPG more or less continues. That can produce very weird predictions when there are the rare cases where teams already near the top are in exceptional form which clearly cannot continue.

So, a few weeks ago, with Bradford and Walsall both in long term stellar form, it was predicting that first place would get 104 points and second place would get 96 or something like that. That was never realistic.

We'll see how these predictions settle down over the next 2-3 weeks. Usually by mid March they are closing in quite accurately.

[JonWallsend]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

What on earth are you talking about?

It’s not difficult,
Points per game is irrelvent until everyone has played the same number of games.

Remind me again of how automatic promotion and play off positions were decided when the season was aborted due to covid and teams had played a different  amount  of games.

[pib]

The only advantage I can think of from having played more games is that having an extra midweek game might fatigue our rivals more (when you include the travel, where applicable) and also have a knock-on effect on their following Saturday game due to them having fewer rest/preparation days. Could this take away a fraction of the advantage of having games in hand? Might be clutching at straws though as it's all a bit intangible.

FWIW we'll not have to wait long until the games played (mostly) level out....

Tuesday 25th Feb
Bromley v Bradford
Cheltenham v Walsall

Tuesday 11th March
Wimbledon v Cheltenham
Colchester v Port Vale
Grimsby v Notts County

Tuesday 25th March
Port Vale v Barrow

Mostly tough-looking games-in-hand for our promotion rivals on paper, so you never know. Cheltenham are in good form and have a big say, Colchester away is a tricky game-in-hand for Vale, as is Notts County's visit to Grimsby. Bradford have to go to Bromley who are no mugs, and Bradford's away record as previously highlighted is not great (W3, D6, L6).

[ravenrover]

For goodness sake people lighten up. Billy was asked to put up his prediction, however he bases it. It is not tablets of stone people have their own opinions , that's fine but to attack this bit of fun in the way some are doing is ridiculous

[pib]

You wanted it. Here it is. Although you probably won't like it....

Remember, to save a lot of very tiresome arguing again, this is NOT predicting who will finish where. It's predicting how many points each final position will end up with. Nothing magic about it, but with a couple of exceptions, it's generally getting the finishing points tallies right to within a couple or 3 points for 15 years now.

So, here's this evening's prediction.

1st place: 90
2nd 89
3rd 88
4th 85
5th 85
6th 82
7th 75
8th 70
9th 69
10th 65

Bit of a bugger if that's anywhere near. It means we'd need to win 10 of our final 13 to make the top 3.

88 points feels high for 3rd place, but there are a lot of teams with already slightly better ppg than us, and similar recent form. Personally, I think we are going to struggle to make the top 3, and this confirms it. We still don't and never have consistently looked like clearly one of the top three sides this season.

Interesting. Very surprised by the high predicted points totals for 2nd and 3rd. Looking at season-to-date PPG this was recently tracking at 81-83 points, so to see 86-88 is surprising, albeit I understand this methodology is probably more nuanced in taking into account recent form.

Not saying this prediction won’t be accurate, and not particularly disagreeing, but it did prompt me to dive a bit deeper.

For 2nd and 3rd place teams to reach 89 and 88 points respectively, of the realistic contenders, it would require the following teams to have the following PPG record between now and the end of the season. (BTW I know this model isn’t about individual teams, but individual teams do actually have to play out the real-life scenario, and below are the ones who are realistically the most likely to do it)

Rovers: 2.38 PPG for 89 points, 2.31 PPG for 88.
Wimbledon: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Notts County: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Bradford: 2.28 PPG for 89, 2.21 PPG for 88.
Port Vale: 2.26 PPG for 89, 2.2 PPG for 88.


The one thing that’s been nagging at me since reading this is, only Walsall so far this season have averaged 2 PPG or more over the season. The rest of the runners and riders have been much more inconsistent.

I think the “last 8 games PPG” might be skewing this a bit. Maybe this makes it more accurate, or maybe it makes it less accurate: https://www.soccerstats.com/table.asp?league=england4&tid=re (if the link doesn’t work, find “relative form” table)

Notts County, Bradford, Rovers and Port Vale are all over performing their season-to-date PPG in the last 8 games by between 20-34%. But 14-15 games is a big chunk of the season (30% ish) - have any of these teams shown so far that they are likely to not only sustain that over the last 13-15 games, but also combine this with the previous 8, so effectively keep up the sort of run required to get to 88-89 points over the course of 21-23 games? It would take ages to do the maths on that which I haven’t got time to do, but it feels unlikely because if they had it in them, we’d have more teams closer to Walsall’s current tally surely?

Maybe they will. Surely that would be quite unusual though because it would mean those teams being in better-than-title-form for nearly half a season, in what feels like a division full of competitive but quite inconsistent teams? It seems to me like there is a chance this will settle down and we might find that the 5 teams in contention for 2nd/3rd place (assuming Walsall are already in a strong enough position to be near-certs) will drop back towards something resembling their season-long PPG over the run-in.

Using season-to-date PPG model here’s the projection, ordered this time in terms of highest PPG, not the PPG of the teams that are currently there:

1st: 94.76 points (2.06 PPG)
2nd: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
3rd: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
4th: 81.88 points (1.78 PPG)
5th: 81.42 points (1.77 PPG)
6th: 80.6 points (1.76 PPG)

Soccer Stats “projected points” table, which takes into account the strength of run-in opponents and home/away records, predicts the following expected points, in order of most to least:
Walsall: 93.38
Wimbledon: 83.26
Port Vale: 82.98
Bradford: 81.55
Rovers: 80.54
Notts: 79.50

This isn’t a million miles away from the above season-to-date PPG projection.

There is also the run-in to take into account. Here’s the “Opponents remaining PPG” for us and the teams around us:
Wimbledon: 1.30
Port Vale: 1.30
Bradford: 1.36
Rovers: 1.36
Notts: 1.44

Again, really close, but suggests we have a similar difficulty run-in to Bradford, slightly easier than Notts County, and slightly more difficult than Vale and Wimbledon.

Whichever way you look at it, it looks like it’s going to be incredibly tight. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if 2nd and 3rd place are decided on the final day.

Great analysis pib and yes, I took find it hard to believe that a total as high as 88 will be required for 3rd spot.

But I've frequently thought "Yeah, THAT doesn't sound right" over the years when I've cracked out these predictions and more often than not found them to be actually quite close to the mark.

There's no saying they will be right this time and they aren't always. And in any case, they are rarely spot on - more an indication of a likely range as things currently look. So I'd read "88" as "Likely but not certain to be in the range 86-90"

You're right by the way that the high totals currently predicted are because several sides have been in excellent form recently (in terms of PPG over the past 10 games). Specifically, Bradford and Notts C, then slightly behind them us, PV and Wimbledon.

For what it's worth (and DON'T read the model like this) the predicted points total per side of you extrapolate current PPG through to the end of the season are:

1st place: 90 Walsall
2nd 89: Bradford
3rd 88 Notts C
4/5th 85 Donny/Wimbledon
6th 82 PV

Here's the thing though. That's not how it works. The idea is that the model reckons SOME team will end up in 2nd with 89, and one in 3rd with 88.

And yes, it's very unlikely that any specific one of the five teams in 2-6th place at the moment will get 89 points and finish second. Because that will take a hell of a run of form as you say. But it's less unlikely that ONE of thosr five will have that run. Similar argument for 88 points for 3rd place.

The limitations of the model are clear, and you correctly identified them. It depends on the assumption that on average (not for each team) current PPG more or less continues. That can produce very weird predictions when there are the rare cases where teams already near the top are in exceptional form which clearly cannot continue.

So, a few weeks ago, with Bradford and Walsall both in long term stellar form, it was predicting that first place would get 104 points and second place would get 96 or something like that. That was never realistic.

We'll see how these predictions settle down over the next 2-3 weeks. Usually by mid March they are closing in quite accurately.

It'll be possibly one of the most interesting seasons to-date in terms of how this model plays out.

Take your point about it being unlikely one of the teams doesn't have that sort of run. That makes me think that 88-89 might be required for 2nd, but possibly a lower total might be OK for third. Probably too early to tell though, and like you say, a few more weeks will likely tell us if the exceptional form of some of the teams will continue, or revert back to something resembling the first half of the season.

Another thing that surprised me about the high totals of 88-89 for 3rd-2nd (and I know this is more anecdotal, and previous seasons are to a large extent irrelevant), is that would better what Wrexham/Mansfield got last year (88 and 86 respectively). It felt last year that the top 3 were SO much better than the rest of the division, in a way that it doesn't feel like anybody except Walsall is this year. To think that two of Rovers, Wimbledon, Port Vale, Bradford or Notts County would better these totals, and get to within 3-4 points of what Stockport achieved last year just doesn't feel right.

There's not much I can statistically offer to back this up though, other than the fact that those two teams had both scored over 60 goals at this stage last season (Stockport had 71), whereas the five teams behind Walsall this season are in the 40s for goals scored, with only Notts County hitting 50, which hints at a much closer division this time.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

The only advantage I can think of from having played more games is that having an extra midweek game might fatigue our rivals more (when you include the travel, where applicable) and also have a knock-on effect on their following Saturday game due to them having fewer rest/preparation days. Could this take away a fraction of the advantage of having games in hand? Might be clutching at straws though as it's all a bit intangible.

FWIW we'll not have to wait long until the games played (mostly) level out....

Tuesday 25th Feb
Bromley v Bradford
Cheltenham v Walsall

Tuesday 11th March
Wimbledon v Cheltenham
Colchester v Port Vale
Grimsby v Notts County

Tuesday 25th March
Port Vale v Barrow

Mostly tough-looking games-in-hand for our promotion rivals on paper, so you never know. Cheltenham are in good form and have a big say, Colchester away is a tricky game-in-hand for Vale, as is Notts County's visit to Grimsby. Bradford have to go to Bromley who are no mugs, and Bradford's away record as previously highlighted is not great (W3, D6, L6).

It's not going to be easy for any team. Things can change very quickly in football and to date, the table has been kind to us, as when we've slipped up, so have others.

I guess most of us feel the way we've played doesn't warrant being in 2nd place.

Most pointers suggest we'll just fall short of Automatic and the gut says we can't afford any more slip ups and we maybe have to pull a big one out of the bag at some point by beating our closest rivals, almost feeling like knock out football.

The only thing that matters is the next game, it's that simple.

[Dutch Uncle]

Some great stuff in this thread. The Danish wit and raconteur Storm Pedersen once said, ‘predictions are very difficult, especially for the future’, so I won’t add to the predictions here. But for some context I will put up the historical average points for positions 1-8 in this division in the 43 seasons since 3 points per win was introduced. For seasons with less than 46 matches played, I have used the dreaded ppg to give a 46-game total for a fair comparison. Note this is not just the COVID season, there were some seasons with only 22 clubs and 42 matches played)

1st: Avg 90.4, High 102, Low 82
2nd: Avg 84.9, High 97, Low 79
3rd: Avg 82.1, High 91, Low 75
4th: Avg 79.2, High 88, Low 72
5th: Avg 75.8, High 82, Low 70
6th: Avg 73.4, High 81, Low 69
7th: Avg 71.5, High 79, Low 68
8th: Avg 69.4. High 76, Low 62

So, the highest points scored which did not make 3rd was 88 by Bournemouth in 1981-82 when there were no playoffs and 4th secured automatic promotion. The highest in fourth place, which missed out on auto and entered the playoffs was by Accrington Stanley 85 in 2015-16, and they missed out on goal difference only. 

So yes, it looks like a high number this year, but 88 would be ground-breaking.

[colincramb]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

What on earth are you talking about?

It’s not difficult,
Points per game is irrelvent until everyone has played the same number of games.

Bloody hell, maths ain’t your strong point is it? If you believe what you’ve just said then you might be best leaving the thread to the adults that can interpret and analyse data without just one agenda

[Jonathan]

Whilst the quality of football across the division feels spectacularly poor, this is proving to be a very competitive season at the top end. As a result, any points predictor like this is fascinating (or I think so anyway). As an eternal optimist I retain the belief that we can get enough points to see us over the line, and that we have a strong enough squad (and good enough manager) to navigate the additional challenges we’re going to face. However a glance at the table shows it’s very precariously balanced and I don’t think we can criticise a calculation model for saying we might not make it! This is a dynamic situation and if we keep on winning (or others start to falter) then the prediction will naturally change from where it is right now. I have to believe that we have more in us in terms of performance, and that the results will come with that. But that’s the nature of a football fan isn’t it. I’m also very biased by my own admission and have been wrong more times than I could ever care to remember! So I find prediction modelling grounding and fascinating.

[TonySoprano]

Honestly, I'd be fine if we finished 4th,  and got a favourable tie in the play offs, with home advantage in the 2nd leg.

Feel we got cheated out of Wembley last season and I'm still gutted about that, and it's the best way to get promoted as we all know 

How were we cheated out of a Wembley appearance last season?  We lost 0-2 fair and square as far as i can recall, and a penalty shoot out is a lottery.

I don’t want to have to be in the play offs,  if that should now be an absolute minimum.

Calm yourself down fella, I'm saying it's how I felt given the circumstances, 10 in a row, being 2-0 up in the first leg, penalties at their end, and the antics of their goalkeeper, which was cheating in my opinion.

No way we are finishing top 3, 4th would be brilliant.

Perfectly calm thank you..

Disappointed yes, I get it, and frustrated.  But not cheated.

OK, I see your completely missing the point, let's move on.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Just a note:

Here's an indication of how sensitive the model is to results at the moment Bradford and Walsall are playing at Bromley and Cheltenham tomorrow.

If Bradford and Walsall both win, the predictor would say this.

1st 90 93
2nd 89 91
3rd 88
4th 85
5th 85
6th 82
7th 75
8th 70
9th 69
10th 65

If they both lose, it will say

1st 90 88
2nd 89 86
3rd 88 85
4th 85 85
5th 85 84
6th 82
7th 75
8th 70 71
9th 69
10th 65 66

[drfchound]

As I said further up the thread, I like this and how it evolves as time goes by.

[Pancho Regan]

Some good food for thought on this thread; well done all those who have put in the time and effort to come up with the various predictions.

Based purely on the games I've watched, and despite the fact that I always err on the side of positivity regarding Rovers, I have a sneaking concern that we don't quite have what it takes to finish in the top three. It hurts even typing that!

I'm a little concerned that we have almost never managed an emphatic victory, and our relatively poor goal difference is evidence of that. I fear that may come back to haunt us.
Those defeats to Chesterfield and Grimsby may prove pivotal come the end of the season.

I always take great encouragement from Grant's post-match interviews. I don't think there is a more honest manager in the league, and he never tries to hide from reality regarding our performances.
He is the first to recognise that we regularly fail to kill teams off, and too often end up scraping a win when we could / should have won more comfortably. The first step towards improvement is recognising where the shortcomings are, and Grant gets it.

I keep thinking we will click and blow some team away with a dominant performance and a big win, but it has arguably happened only a couple of times this season.

On the other hand, having said all that, we sit 2nd in the table coming to the end of February and there are many points still to play for. Our recent form is excellent, with 6 League wins wrapped around those two defeats. That bodes well for the run-in if we can keep it up.

It's going to be a white-knuckle ride but we can do it!

[ncRover]

Something positive for our next few fixtures:

Newport’s away league position is worse than their actual league position

Bromley’s home league position is worse than their actual league position

[RoversInSpain]

Has anyone mentioned one game at a time?

Sorry, 2025 boring fart award goes to…

It is absolutely tights as a …
It’s good stuff though, we are right in there, lose the plot for a couple of games then scrap out a couple of wins, Bogey team coming next.
What more do we want? It’s great really.

[dickos1]

Some great stuff in this thread. The Danish wit and raconteur Storm Pedersen once said, ‘predictions are very difficult, especially for the future’, so I won’t add to the predictions here. But for some context I will put up the historical average points for positions 1-8 in this division in the 43 seasons since 3 points per win was introduced. For seasons with less than 46 matches played, I have used the dreaded ppg to give a 46-game total for a fair comparison. Note this is not just the COVID season, there were some seasons with only 22 clubs and 42 matches played)

1st: Avg 90.4, High 102, Low 82
2nd: Avg 84.9, High 97, Low 79
3rd: Avg 82.1, High 91, Low 75
4th: Avg 79.2, High 88, Low 72
5th: Avg 75.8, High 82, Low 70
6th: Avg 73.4, High 81, Low 69
7th: Avg 71.5, High 79, Low 68
8th: Avg 69.4. High 76, Low 62

So, the highest points scored which did not make 3rd was 88 by Bournemouth in 1981-82 when there were no playoffs and 4th secured automatic promotion. The highest in fourth place, which missed out on auto and entered the playoffs was by Accrington Stanley 85 in 2015-16, and they missed out on goal difference only. 

So yes, it looks like a high number this year, but 88 would be ground-breaking.

I agree with this Dutch,
If we get 2 points a game from now on in, 84 points will be enough in my opinion.
A small improvement on this form and we’re almost guaranteed a top 3 spot.

[Lesonthewest]

Some good food for thought on this thread; well done all those who have put in the time and effort to come up with the various predictions.

Based purely on the games I've watched, and despite the fact that I always err on the side of positivity regarding Rovers, I have a sneaking concern that we don't quite have what it takes to finish in the top three. It hurts even typing that!

I'm a little concerned that we have almost never managed an emphatic victory, and our relatively poor goal difference is evidence of that. I fear that may come back to haunt us.
Those defeats to Chesterfield and Grimsby may prove pivotal come the end of the season.

I always take great encouragement from Grant's post-match interviews. I don't think there is a more honest manager in the league, and he never tries to hide from reality regarding our performances.
He is the first to recognise that we regularly fail to kill teams off, and too often end up scraping a win when we could / should have won more comfortably. The first step towards improvement is recognising where the shortcomings are, and Grant gets it.

I keep thinking we will click and blow some team away with a dominant performance and a big win, but it has arguably happened only a couple of times this season.

On the other hand, having said all that, we sit 2nd in the table coming to the end of February and there are many points still to play for. Our recent form is excellent, with 6 League wins wrapped around those two defeats. That bodes well for the run-in if we can keep it up.

It's going to be a white-knuckle ride but we can do it!

Great Post, & we need to stick by Grant come what may. He will get us there.

[Lesonthewest]

Points per game is only relevant once all the games are finished

How is PPG table not relevant now but in your mind the league table right now is relevant ? Making it up as you go along for whatever suits

I spent all last season trying to explain to all you negative folk that the league table is irrelevant until the end of the season

There goes the 'negative' word, bit early that even by your standards. Your post sounds a little condescending too.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I'd suggest that pretty definitively the PPG table by this time in the season indicates how well we have collected points per game so far this season. And that's not irrelevant. Ever.

[Draytonian III]

Has anyone checked other League 2 clubs to see if they’re discussing this topic

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Has anyone checked other League 2 clubs to see if they’re discussing this topic

If they're not, there's something wrong or maybe over confident. No doubt many Walsall fans will be looking over their shoulders.

Also interesting to hear 'experts' analysis of League Two after the weekends results.

https://youtu.be/N6yQzvIwCcM?si=qsrOElDV6FFVEhGo

They seem to be more positive about Bradford and maybe Port Vale given the injury problems there. Otherwise, they
suggests it's anyone's race, albeit Walsall have a bit in hand.

[GazLaz]

You wanted it. Here it is. Although you probably won't like it....

Remember, to save a lot of very tiresome arguing again, this is NOT predicting who will finish where. It's predicting how many points each final position will end up with. Nothing magic about it, but with a couple of exceptions, it's generally getting the finishing points tallies right to within a couple or 3 points for 15 years now.

So, here's this evening's prediction.

1st place: 90
2nd 89
3rd 88
4th 85
5th 85
6th 82
7th 75
8th 70
9th 69
10th 65

Bit of a bugger if that's anywhere near. It means we'd need to win 10 of our final 13 to make the top 3.

88 points feels high for 3rd place, but there are a lot of teams with already slightly better ppg than us, and similar recent form. Personally, I think we are going to struggle to make the top 3, and this confirms it. We still don't and never have consistently looked like clearly one of the top three sides this season.

If the third place team gets 88 points I’ll be genuinely amazed.