Talk:All-time FA Premier League table

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Goal Difference sorting[edit]

Is broken. It works fine when you sort by ascending order (large negative numbers on top, large positive numbers on bottom) but is messed up when you try to put it in descending order. 69.3.239.162 02:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I think the points average system is wrong, it should be points total divided by amount of games not seasons, that way Man Utd for example average 2.05 rather than 79 which does not make sence. Also this this takes into account that the league now has 38 games rather than 42.

I was going to edit this but think its better to just wait till the end of the season 

i believe its average points per season and not per game

Bolton[edit]

Bolton have had 8 seasons in the Premier League at the end of 2006/07.

  • 1995/96
  • 1997/98
  • 2000/01
  • 2001/02
  • 2002/03
  • 2003/04
  • 2004/05
  • 2006/07


FIXED


Chelsea[edit]

seem to have played 586 games adding up wins, draws, losses etc. not the 582 it should be. Chelsea have in fact only lost 142 games, not 146.

Chelsea's points total is also wrong it is now 1018, not 1014.

FIXED


Watch List for 2008/09 Season[edit]

Manchester United will early in the season become the 1st team since the Premier League's inception in 1991/92 to bring up their 400th Premier League victory. It will take place with their 6th victory of the new season.

Everton with a decent season should overtake Blackburn Rovers who are currently only 5 points ahead of Everton and easily within reach during season 2008/09.

West Ham United will, as long as they are not mired in a relegation dogfight, overtake Leeds United late in the season.

Fulham will overtake Leicester City, most likely towards the end of the season, perhaps early 2009, but with a super season they will go close to overtaking Charlton Athletic as well - who are currently 50pts ahead of Fulham.

Sunderland's' goal difference at some stage during the 2008/09 season is likely to plunge below Derby County and once again give Sunderland the worst All-Time Goal Difference in the history of the Premier League.

Sunderland will overtake Derby County in the opening weeks of the new season, but are unlikely to make any progress beyond that position, which will be 22nd All-Time for the Premier League.

Portsmouth will overtake fallen giant Nottingham Forest early in the 2008/09 season, and will overtake Derby County during early 2009, perhaps around February.

Wigan Athletic will overtake Sheffield United early in the season, and will likely overtake Crystal Palace late in the season, early in 2009.

West Bromwich Albion will overtake Reading with their first win of the season, or indeed their second draw, and will go very close to overtaking Sheffield United if they stay up, although it is possible they may just survive without overtaking them.

Hull City and Stoke City will have to overtake Swindon Town, Wolverhapton Wanderers and Barnsley if they are to have any hope of avoiding relegation in their maiden season in the Premier League. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.139.104.226 (talk) 11:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC) 202.139.104.226 (talk) 10:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea and Liverpool should both reach the 1000 goals scored marker fairly early on in the season. Whoever does this first (most probably Liverpool) will only be the third team to do this.

Manchester City will most likely reach the 500 goals scored milestone early in the season, the 14th team to have accomplished this feat.

With a good season, Tottenham, Stoke or Hull could be finish with a positive goal difference. They would join the other 8 teams who currently have a positve goal difference, none of whom will realistically lose this title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.121.195 (talk) 11:57, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Watch List for 2009/10 Season[edit]

Aston Villa will early in the season be the first Premier Peage team to bring up a record 200 draws in the Premier League. DONE

Later in the season, Aston Villa are likely to become only the fifth team to score 1,000 points in the Premier League since it began. A similar season to the just passed 2008/09 season will see this feat accomplished in the last game of the 2009/10 season, though surely Aston Villa would be looking to build on the just completed season during 2009/10.

Relatively early in the season, one would hope, Tottenham Hotspur will overtake Newcastle United on the all-time points table for the Premier League. DONE

Slightly later in the season, though perhaps not that much later, Everton will also overtake Newcastle United on the all-time points table for the Premier League. DONE

Around the mid-point of the 2009-10 Premier League campaign, Manchester City is likely to overtake Southampton - now of League One - on the all-time Premier League points table. Only 30pts is required to achieve this feat. Only relegation could prevent the newly rich Manchester City from achieving this feat. DONE

A very good 11th season in the Top Flight from Bolton Wanderers will see Bolton become only the 15th team in Premier League history to achieve 500 points in the top division since it became the Premiership.

Towards the mid-point of the season, small London club Fulham are likely to overtake both another small London club Wimbledon (now MK Dons) (DONE) and also fallen Yorkshire giant Sheffield Wednesday (DONE) on the all-time Premier League table. Later on in the season, should it be a strong campaign similar to the current season, Fulham are likely to overtake Coventry City during the closing weeks of the campaign if they can hold the form of 2008/09 through 2009/10.

Also during the season, and most likely just prior, or perhaps even at the time of, overtaking Wimbledon and Sheffield Wednesday in the all-time Premier League table, Fulham will likely notch up its 100th victory in the all-time Premier League table. With this achievement Fulham will become the 17th team to achieve this feat in Premier League history. DONE

A fairly good season from the escapologists Sunderland should see Sunderland overtaking League One Championship winners Leicester City on the all-time Premier League table towards the end of the 2009/10 campaign. DONE

Early in the season Birmingham City will overtake the Bernie Ecclestone owned Queens Park Rangers - DONE and soon after that the Icarus like Ipswich Town with only a handful of victories. - DONE Towards the latter half of the season - unless Birmingham surprise on the upside, Birmingham will also overtake fallen giants Nottingham Forest to enter the Top 25 of all-time sides in the Premier League in terms of points achieved. DONE

Wigan Athletic will not have it that easy moving up the all-time Premier League table. It is likely to be past the half-way mark of the 2009/10 campaign before Wigan Athletic can move past Norwich City in the all-time Premier League table - but they will do it - DONE - later on, they should also challenge and themselves exceed the points table of Queens Park Rangers - though if Wigan are not careful this feat will elude them. An exceptional season from Wigan will also see them overtake Ipswich Town on the all-time Premier League points table.

Early in the 2009/10 campaign, surprise packets Stoke City will overtake the disappointing Watford - DONE in the all-time Premier League points table, and soon after that Stoke will go past Bradford City - currently languishing on 62 pts - DONE Another season to match, or even slightly exceed their first season in the top flight - which is not inconceivable, but surely unlikely, will see Stoke City overtake Oldham Athletic in the closing days of the 2009/10 Premier League campaign, and perhaps even on the last day, Reading. It will take an exceptional 46pts at a minimum to achieve this - and should it be achieved, Stoke will comfortably avoid relegation for a second season and look to strengthen as they head into their third season in the Premier League.

Another 2008/09 Premier League debutant, the exciting and mercurial Hull City will have a tougher time matching Stoke City's feats in that department, but during the 2009/10 Premier League campaign Hull should exceed Watford (DONE) on the overall Premier League all-time table, and later in the season the points haul of Bradford City (DONE) should be within their grasp - even if they once again find themselves in a relegation scrap late on in the season.

Newly promoted (for the second-time to the Premier League) Wolverhampton Wanderers have a similar trajectory to Hull City to follow. With their first points of the campaign, Wolves stand a good chance of overhauling the Premier League points table achieved by Barnsley - an early win or two draws will suffice - DONE, and then looking forward to the middle part of the campaign Wolves will surely overtake Watford (DONE) on the all-time Premier League points table and have their eyes on overhauling Bradford City (DONE) well before the end of the campaign. A better season than Hull will also project Wolves ahead of the Yorkshire team, though their battles for position are likely to remain tight on the way to the last weekend of the season.

Newboys Burnley face the hardest task of any of the newly promoted teams in terms of moving up the all-time Premier League points table - though they will need to do it if they plan on staying in the Premier League for any more than a brief time-period. Towards the end of the campaign - although not too close for Burnley's sake - Burnley will need to overtake the barely remembered Swindon Town - languishing at the foot of this table with only 30pts, soon after that - surely any hope of survival (although Hull City nearly proved otherwise this campaign), Burnley will need to overtake another Yorkshire club Barnsley to have any hope of survival - Hull City managed it by dint of a 20-goal superior goal-difference - and an extra point than Newcastle United - surely Burnley will need to at least match this feat to have any hope of being around for the 2010/11 Premier League campaign. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.139.104.226 (talk) 11:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Later in the 2010/11 campaign West Ham United is likely to become only the 10th team in Premier League history to notch up its 200th win in the Premier League since its inception in 1992/93 - West Ham needs only 13 victories during the season to achieve this feat.202.139.104.226 (talk) 10:49, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All-time?[edit]

It seems like it would be nice to have a list which covered the top division in English football since the Football League began, rather than somewhat artificially limiting it to the years since 1992. The distinction between the old First Division and the Premier League, as I understand it, is basically significant for internal organization and the like, but doesn't really have anything to do with clubs' performances. I can see how this list would be useful, but it seems like it would be good to list the whole century's worth of results, as well. john k (talk) 22:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can find something like that at Clas Glenning's page but the Premier League is not the same as the old Football League Division One, and data like "all time tables" should not be combined. - fchd (talk) 22:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are different league's in name and organisation only. They both represent the top teir of English football and thus should be combined as one table. We count titles as all titles won, not just premier league titles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.190.61 (talk) 03:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing stopping you taking the time and effort to do that you know!202.139.104.226 (talk) 08:18, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which would then be Original Research, wouldn't it? - fchd (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No it wouldn't. Original research entirely and solely refers to drawing ideas and conclusions which are subject to opinion from data. Compiling that data and merely presenting the facts is not original research in any form, and on top of this, since this data has been compiled hundreds of times before, it's not original.
That said, however, I'm still of the opinion that we should restrict this to the Premier League years only. Falastur2 Talk 14:12, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think this would be a case where it would be useful to have both a list restricted to the Premier League years and one covering the whole history of the top division. john k (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Percentile Averages[edit]

I think all data here should be presented both as totals and as averages. Or as much as possible. i.e. We could present the wins as a percentage, either in a new column, or in brackets besides the total so Man U might result in 449 (64.5%) 147 (21%) 100 (14%). I don't think this would make it too convolute. Similarly with goals for and against, we could have the average goals per game. I am happy to do the maths and present it here, but I am less confident updating the article. CrazyFoolMrT (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...my main worry with this is that so many percentage statistics are going to really clog up the table and detract from the actual numerical information. Is there another way of presenting this data? If we could find an alternate way I would happily do the coding side. Falastur2 Talk 16:26, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That may well be the case, it may b too much info, I like stats as percentages, because, of course, the number of losses felt by a team is only relevant when considered alongside the number of games played, hence, that is already a percentile consideration. Perhaps there could be an option to show/hide percentile data? CrazyFoolMrT (talk) 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the late reply. I think it is - just - possible to get a wikitable to hide columns, but it's beyond what I can do, and I think it would look messy - the column would probably have to still be visible and simply shrink in size, or require some annoying buttons outside of the columns to open/close them, and it would just look awkward. Not an expert on this level of coding though, I just know how to do stuff like adding extra rows and wikisorting data. Falastur2 Talk 19:05, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is interesting, but I'm personally not convinced its something that needs to be put into this article. Yes, to make a fair comparison between teams you sometimes need to compare teams by using percentages. However, this table is designed to rank all the teams that have been in the Premier League. Teams that have not played as many games/ seasons and get ranked down because of that are ranked down for a reason - they're not good enough to consistently be in the top flight! Newcastle and Leeds United are cases in point, although their average points per season would have them ranked 5th and 6th - the fact these teams have been relegated means they start to slip down the table. Hence the more consistent and stable teams are rewarded (Aston Villa, Tottenham, Everton). A similar logic applies across other columns.202.139.104.226 (talk) 09:10, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relegation[edit]

Is this necessary? I don't how implying more or less relegations are good, only not being relegated is an achievement, I would presume that the less times it happens the better but WBA for example have been relegated 4 times, but that also means they won promotion before this. Is this better than Oldham for example who got relegated once and never returned? I think it should be removed, maybe to be replaced by 4th place (considering the emphasis put on the top four). Xenomorph1984 (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to disagree on both counts, though of course it's just my opinion. The number of times relegated shows a club's history of failing in the league and then recovering - it's particularly poignant since given the growing claims that the Premier League - Football League gulf gives teams the ability to bounce back quickly, but many teams fail to do so, thus indicating that those who have repeated the feat numerous times must either be of a higher standard, or better-managed.
The other part I disagree with, though again it's entirely personal preference - and perhaps even moreso than the last point - is that columns for the top four should be added in their place. My fear for this is that the statistics will be deceiving. Bear in mind that though the "Big Four" haven't existed since the start of the Premier League, neither has the era of four Champions League berths - and unsurprisingly, those two almost entirely coincide - only four teams got into the top four since the fourth CL place was given to English football, and only two have done it since Chelsea were bought by Abramovic (and Liverpool's collapse this season allowed that number to grow from one). If we were to only show stats for the top four places since the PL earned its fourth spot, then I would suggest that all that the numbers would show is that the four teams in the Big Four have all had their own successes and that Liverpool and Arsenal have been a tiny step beneath United and Chelsea in the last 9 years - it wouldn't really show much else because so few other teams would have anything to show. The other alternative is to show top four places since 1992 itself, but the problem with that is that for about the first decade of the Premier League, achieving fourth, or in the earlier days third place was little more to show than achieving sixth or seventh. Sure, there were teams who were always going to finish in the top third, as there are teams now who are odds-on to hit the Europa League - but it doesn't have the same impact as now, and the combination of early-PL top four stats and late-PL top four wouldn't line up. If I were to suggest anything then perhaps a more true figure would be to show how many times each team qualified for every European cup competition, which I think would be a fairer stat but still somewhat dubious due to the changing fashions of the league.
Just to clarify - just my opinions; I do tend to be somewhat long-winded and perhaps overbearing in my explanations. If anyone has a differing opinion then by all means shout me down :) Falastur2 Talk 20:45, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with the comment about the top 4, although I still think relegation sends the wrong message. Perhaps "Promotion to Premier League" or something to that affect? Of course then we are talking about a different league, not the premiership which relegation does relate to, so maybe not! hmmm.... Xenomorph1984 (talk) 11:14, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm far more receptive to that kind of change. Your counter-point is true, but I wouldn't object to a change so much. The problem is, though, a team which was in the PL when it was formed, but then got relegated and never returned would have 0 in that column, so...hmm...I'm not sure anymore. Falastur2 Talk 17:25, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:All-time_FA_Premier_League_table&oldid=1198437666"