All the players we 'missed out' on...

[Hoop Blah]

I would take the opposite view - Bikey might not have had the opportunity to impose himself on the defence and new signings might have had an unsettling effect on the admirable team spirit that has been a big part of our recent run.

It's all mights, ifs and opinions and as you say it's pure conjecture...

I agree with the point regarding Bikey and the impact he's had, although obviously he wasn't available for nearly the whole of Jan and Feb and so we could've done with specialist defensive reinforcements for the 5 games he (and Sonko) missed (we were probably unfortunate that Duberry got injured when he did though).

[Uke]

I would take the opposite view - Bikey might not have had the opportunity to impose himself on the defence and new signings might have had an unsettling effect on the admirable team spirit that has been a big part of our recent run.

It's all mights, ifs and opinions and as you say it's pure conjecture...

I agree with the point regarding Bikey and the impact he's had, although obviously he wasn't available for nearly the whole of Jan and Feb and so we could've done with specialist defensive reinforcements for the 5 games he (and Sonko) missed (we were probably unfortunate that Duberry got injured when he did though).

We had the cover in Pearce who just started to become involved. Bikey's return came at the wrong time for him hence the loan.

All of these were like 'new signings'

[papereyes]

I would take the opposite view - Bikey might not have had the opportunity to impose himself on the defence and new signings might have had an unsettling effect on the admirable team spirit that has been a big part of our recent run.

It's all mights, ifs and opinions and as you say it's pure conjecture...

It was getting rid of a player that improved team spirit ...

Signing the right centre back, right winger and forward in January would not have hurt. You could argue that we did get a right winger in January and he'll be GREAT next season.

[Royal Rother]

It was getting rid of a player that improved team spirit ...

You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment...

[Hoop Blah]

I would take the opposite view - Bikey might not have had the opportunity to impose himself on the defence and new signings might have had an unsettling effect on the admirable team spirit that has been a big part of our recent run.

It's all mights, ifs and opinions and as you say it's pure conjecture...

I agree with the point regarding Bikey and the impact he's had, although obviously he wasn't available for nearly the whole of Jan and Feb and so we could've done with specialist defensive reinforcements for the 5 games he (and Sonko) missed (we were probably unfortunate that Duberry got injured when he did though).

We had the cover in Pearce who just started to become involved. Bikey's return came at the wrong time for him hence the loan.

All of these were like 'new signings'

Pearce wasn't involved though because it was clear Coppell didn't want to play him. He was given a brief run out against Spurs, which saw him hauled off at half time, and then he wasn't used again. Instead of playing Pearce, Coppell went for a player he'd forgotten could play centre half, and even after a couple of decent performances as emergency cover he was quickly dropped once players returned to the squad.

Thats not the kind of reinforcement I was talking about. I meant players the manager would trust to play in a league game and ones who would hopefully command a first team spot right now (players a bit like Cahill I guess).

[sheshnu]

Time for an update on how our friends the January Signings are doing?

Well since I last looked at it Zarate and Reid seem to have perked up a bit, other than that it looks to be the usual suspects presumably pleasing and disappointing their respective managers. Also Hagen has made his first Wigan appearance and in doing so has now spent more time on the pitch than Kebe. Maybe Jimmy will get a game now that Matejovsky is suspended...

Anyway, the winners and losers so far:

Goals - McFadden 4; Zarate, Villa 3
Assists - Mcfadden, Murphy, Taylor 2
MOM - Reid 3
Appearance (%) - Carroll, Hangeland, Bardsley 100; Evans 99; Steinsson 95; Taylor 92; Cahill 91
Points (the important bit!) - Evans 16; Palacios 14; Bardsley 13; King 11; Murphy, Matejovsky, Reid 10

Overall Sunderland seem to have been doing a lot better since their new players signed (although I don't know where Prica's gone) while Bolton's signings have been playing a lot but despite their best efforts not really helping matters up there (Cohen and Rasiak excluded, of course).

McLeish looks to have done good business in the window with his players banging in goals all over the place and the team picking up points nicely.

Cohen, Rasiak, Mills, Kallio, Litmanen, Alves, Kebe, Figueroa and Hagen have yet to really contribute anything of any substance.

[papereyes]

Getting a youngster rated at £10 million can not have hurt, to be fair.

[Uke]

Time for an update on how our friends the January Signings are doing?

Well since I last looked at it Zarate and Reid seem to have perked up a bit, other than that it looks to be the usual suspects presumably pleasing and disappointing their respective managers. Also Hagen has made his first Wigan appearance and in doing so has now spent more time on the pitch than Kebe. Maybe Jimmy will get a game now that Matejovsky is suspended...

Anyway, the winners and losers so far:

Goals - McFadden 4; Zarate, Villa 3
Assists - Mcfadden, Murphy, Taylor 2
MOM - Reid 3
Appearance (%) - Carroll, Hangeland, Bardsley 100; Evans 99; Steinsson 95; Taylor 92; Cahill 91
Points (the important bit!) - Evans 16; Palacios 14; Bardsley 13; King 11; Murphy, Matejovsky, Reid 10

Overall Sunderland seem to have been doing a lot better since their new players signed (although I don't know where Prica's gone) while Bolton's signings have been playing a lot but despite their best efforts not really helping matters up there (Cohen and Rasiak excluded, of course).

McLeish looks to have done good business in the window with his players banging in goals all over the place and the team picking up points nicely.

Cohen, Rasiak, Mills, Kallio, Litmanen, Alves, Kebe, Figueroa and Hagen have yet to really contribute anything of any substance.

Matt Taylor scored two at the weekend for Notlob (its a palindrome, you can register a complaint if you want to...)

[sheshnu]

Matt Taylor scored two at the weekend for Notlob (its a palindrome, you can register a complaint if you want to...)

Here is the full list of goalscorers then:
5 McFadden
3 Villa, Zarate
2 Taylor
1 Cohen, King, Matejovsky, Prica, Reid

Assists:
2 McFadden, Murphy, Taylor
1 Palacios, Reid, Steinsson, Sterjovski

And the following have been men of matches:
3 Reid
1 Ghaly, McFadden, Stubbs

[Uke]

The weekend is over and the table has changed...

Sunderland 13
Newcastle 11
Reading 10
Birmingham 10
Middlesbrough 10
Wigan 11
Fulham 8
Bolton 4
Derby 3

Wonder where Sunderland would be if they'd been allowed to give us 6 million!

[Huntley & Palmer]

Probably more points I would imagine and less for us

[Wycombe Royal]

To me it looks like the best signings have been Hangeland

A fantastic signing. Did you see his superb defending that led to the goal for Kenwyne Jones on Saturday? I've seen Sunday league defenders with better defensive skills. One mistake you can live with, but three mistakes in a row?

[Huntley & Palmer]

IdeaLOL

[Hoop Blah]

The weekend is over and the table has changed...

Sunderland 13
Newcastle 11
Reading 10
Birmingham 10
Middlesbrough 10
Wigan 11
Fulham 8
Bolton 4
Derby 3

Wonder where Sunderland would be if they'd been allowed to give us 6 million!

I guess that's the problem with the whole idea of your table. As interesting as it is to see. and pleasing from your figures, we'll never know what it would look like if none of the teams signed anyone or if some of the sides bought in other players.

[Uke]

The weekend is over and the table has changed...

Sunderland 13
Newcastle 11
Reading 10
Birmingham 10
Middlesbrough 10
Wigan 11
Fulham 8
Bolton 4
Derby 3

Wonder where Sunderland would be if they'd been allowed to give us 6 million!

I guess that's the problem with the whole idea of your table. As interesting as it is to see. and pleasing from your figures, we'll never know what it would look like if none of the teams signed anyone or if some of the sides bought in other players.

Ihe point is really to see if the people who said we should have spent millions to improve our position were correct or not and we won't know that until the season ends. But we're doing OK I would reckon.

At the moment the biggest bang for bucks spent is Newcastle!

[papereyes]

The weekend is over and the table has changed...

Sunderland 13
Newcastle 11
Reading 10
Birmingham 10
Middlesbrough 10
Wigan 11
Fulham 8
Bolton 4
Derby 3

Wonder where Sunderland would be if they'd been allowed to give us 6 million!

I guess that's the problem with the whole idea of your table. As interesting as it is to see. and pleasing from your figures, we'll never know what it would look like if none of the teams signed anyone or if some of the sides bought in other players.

There's no control.

You could compare with the form just before Christmas, I guess, but that takes no heed of who the sides played before and after Christmas.

[Uke]

It doen't need a control (or blinding either) as we're not comparing form, just the results of the spend once spending finished

The sample is those teams deemed to be in the shit at the end of January - with added Toon.

Therefore they serve as their own control

[Hoop Blah]

It doen't need a control (or blinding either) as we're not comparing form, just the results of the spend once spending finished

The sample is those teams deemed to be in the shit at the end of January - with added Toon.

Therefore they serve as their own control

But it proves nothing.

Those that said we should've spent money aren't shown to be wrong because with the addition of a half decent forward or centre back to compliment the signing of Matejovsky we might've beaten Bolton and Villa or got a point up at Everton.

You just can't tell what would've happened if we'd signed anyone else in the same way as we don't know where Birmingham would be without the signing or McFadden, or where Sunderland would be without adding Andy Reid.

It's all ifs buts and maybes and the only thing the table shows is how many points the sides have got since the window closed, it doesn't give any insight or proof as to why they've got the points.

[papereyes]

Statistics do give answers but you have to be absolutely certain what question it is you're asking in the first place.

I also find it funny(?) that when we put in an international midfielder who cost the best portion of £1 million and got him up to speed in the Premiership, our results improved.

[Uke]

It doen't need a control (or blinding either) as we're not comparing form, just the results of the spend once spending finished

The sample is those teams deemed to be in the shit at the end of January - with added Toon.

Therefore they serve as their own control

But it proves nothing.

Those that said we should've spent money aren't shown to be wrong because with the addition of a half decent forward or centre back to compliment the signing of Matejovsky we might've beaten Bolton and Villa or got a point up at Everton.

You just can't tell what would've happened if we'd signed anyone else in the same way as we don't know where Birmingham would be without the signing or McFadden, or where Sunderland would be without adding Andy Reid.

It's all ifs buts and maybes and the only thing the table shows is how many points the sides have got since the window closed, it doesn't give any insight or proof as to why they've got the points.

I agree , all it does show is how many points the sides have got since the window closed.

How else can we measure the efficacy of our total transfer window spend compared to other teams in similar positions for this season? Can you think of a better measure?