| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) 18:03 - Jul 31 with 1018 views | unstableblue |
As we've all now signed up to the Unstable model, and it is agreed Town victories and subsequent 3 points will be derived through solving the 'Unstable 4 point model' (patent pending):
a) score more goals than the opposition (and not own goals), by a balanced combination of:
1. having the better players
2. having the better system of play
3. wanting to win the game more than the opposition
So looking ahead to Morecombe after two pre-season friendlies that have not convinced in a number of areas (yes I know these games don't count), where is the team against the above proven methodology ahead of the Morecombe opener:
Cook has promised us quite forcibly at the Fans Forum to 3 being his baseline, even as he asked for patience with getting 2 right (allowing time to gel), he will show us that last seasons lack of commitment will not be repeated. And the players will 'give everything' on the pitch as a baseline. Good and important, and we hope to see it - albeit Col U did want it more the other night.
In theory given the investment, and given the weaker opposition with Morecombe, then 1 is also hopefully a given.
So we come back again to 2, the BIG TWO, where the manager earns his salt, the elephant in the room for a decade - system, tactics, shape, TECHNICAL..... sounds like we were ragged at times today, as we were against Col U. "No assistance manager needed, Cook has got this". Franny and Roberts supplement, but he is going to deliver 2. This is where we'll need to be patient, Rome wasn't built in a day. But this factor within the formula worries me the most.
To Morecombe... where we can use the formulae again to assess our progress.
(please send me a private message if you'd like to use the model yourself, there are I am afraid royalty charges)
|  |
| |  |
| Twitter on 18:35 - Jul 31 with 922 views | unstableblue |
When you're own social media state "Town caught sleeping and the away side capitalise" then maybe 3 isn't quite the given we'd hoped!!
("only a pre-season, only a pre-season, only a pre-season") | |
| |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 21:10 - Jul 31 with 829 views | BasingstokeBlue |
I have no idea what “the unstable model is”. Did you start drinking long before I did? |  |
| |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 22:42 - Jul 31 with 764 views | unstableblue |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 21:10 - Jul 31 by BasingstokeBlue |
I have no idea what “the unstable model is”. Did you start drinking long before I did? |
Give in to the truth that is it’s simplicity
It is undeniable
Embrace it | |
| |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 22:59 - Jul 31 with 732 views | ketton_itfc |
Eh?? |  | | |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 08:02 - Aug 1 with 592 views | wkj |
I honestly have to say - I have entirely no clue what you're really trying to get at here.
How would you summarise this? |  |
| |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 09:05 - Aug 1 with 499 views | Coastalblue |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 08:02 - Aug 1 by wkj |
I honestly have to say - I have entirely no clue what you're really trying to get at here.
How would you summarise this? |
I think you're just inviting further head scrtching and confusion. There's a lot of thought and effort gone into a post there, but I don't have the foggiest either what it's about or supposed to mean. |  |
| |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 09:29 - Aug 1 with 466 views | Kropotkin123 |
| So where are we in relation to the Unstable winning formulae(c) on 21:10 - Jul 31 by BasingstokeBlue |
I have no idea what “the unstable model is”. Did you start drinking long before I did? |
I think I've finally cracked this... It's called the "unstable model" because the OP is called unstableblue and they created the model.
The model is referred to as a 4 point model. But it is actually a one point model (score more than the opposition) with 3 sub points (by having better players, having a better system or having more desire).
a3) Cook has promised us our players will want it more than the opposition as a minimum. But in the friendly against Colchester, they cared more.
a2) The OP says Cook has asked us for patience to play a better system. Whilst the OP understands this, they would like to refer to the friendly game against Colchester for this not being apparent. The OP did not state whether they were aware that they instantly contradicted their understanding.
a1) Having better players was not discussed.
The poster has committed to revisiting this model after the Morecambe game.
If you want to use the model, you will have to pay an undisclosed amount of royalties.
Overall the post is not as negative as it first seems, is intended to be light-hearted, and is not deserving of the down votes, even if the referencing to Colchester is somewhat contracting. [Post edited 1 Aug 2021 9:46]
|  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
