Sass: Your eyes only

[Sir X]

Yawwwwwwwwwwwn , you seem to conjugate data for theory

* no team outside the top 3 in squad value and wage bill has won the Prem except for Leicester

That is DATA !

*Second, in the RA era, squad value in all the winners, (Leicester again being the outlier), has increased through acquisition.

That is Data

* Third, with a few exceptions (e.g. Chelsea last year, Manu** two years ago), the top 4 most valuable clubs have always qualified for European football (Europa or UCL) but only the top 3 in value consistently have been challenging for the title.

That is DATA

Theory involves : a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based, which would lead you to examine the practice or practical: of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas


So far , I have heard duppy,dinglebrain ,klown, I expect more vitriol to come as I point out your lack of comprehension and presentation....hehe . Take your mediction ,take a deep breath , do some zen excercise before you present your data as theories.

This is theory :Squad value can only be increased/decreased by competition, yes player performance financed through a net spend.

[Paul Marin]

Yawwwwwwwwwwwn , you seem to conjugate data for theory

* no team outside the top 3 in squad value and wage bill has won the Prem except for Leicester

That is DATA !

*Second, in the RA era, squad value in all the winners, (Leicester again being the outlier), has increased through acquisition.

That is Data

* Third, with a few exceptions (e.g. Chelsea last year, Manu** two years ago), the top 4 most valuable clubs have always qualified for European football (Europa or UCL) but only the top 3 in value consistently have been challenging for the title.

That is DATA

Theory involves : a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based, which would lead you to examine the practice or practical: of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas


So far , I have heard duppy,dinglebrain ,klown, I expect more vitriol to come as I point out your lack of comprehension and presentation....hehe . Take your mediction ,take a deep breath , do some zen excercise before you present your data as theories.

This is theory :Squad value can only be increased/decreased by competition, yes player performance financed through a net spend.

LOL!! Klown, me ago run outta name fi call you. Plus you figet "Disgrace", "Turncoat", "Eedyat", "Dyam Eedyat", "Lyad" and many more - proving once again you are not very good at paying attention. You concur with the facts, then you advance a "theory" that makes no frigging sense as usual. Put your "theory" into a comprehensible sentence then we can talk.

Second, my "theory" is based on those facts that you have agreed with. You are really a class act, daft to the nth degree. Duppy. Yu nuh tyad fi me kick off u face?

[Paul Marin]

Yawwwwwwwwwwwn , you seem to conjugate data for theory

LOL!!! Do you know what the word "conjugate" means? Genius - you lef' off dat deh name to'...LOL!!! Wooooooooooooiiiiiiiiiiiiieeeeee!!!! It mussi ruff when u nuh have no brain fi werk wid. Conjugate data WITH theory maybe, but not "for"...and even so, that makes no sense in context. Twit. (Figet that name to'). I think the word you are looking for is "conflate" maybe. But who knows?

[Sir X]

LOL,hehe, you have lost it , unhinged ! now I am a genius ,comprehension and presentation isnt your strong suit, get Pet'y maybe he can help you with the semantics.

Enough jokes for the day , lata.Work on some more data

[Paul Marin]

LOL,hehe, you have lost it , unhinged now I am a genius ,comprehension and presentation isnt your strong suit, get Pet'y maybe he can help you with the semantics.

Enough jokes for the day , lata.

Grammar is not your strong suit. Here, this will help: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/conjugate But I don't expect you to understand. Like I said, you not too bright. Funny how you answer this one but not the next one. LOL!!! Klown. Face kick off!!!!

[Sir X]

Mi mental conjugate.....lol...lol....yuh know how fi link ....LOLOL....diss bredda nuh righted !

[Paul Marin]

Mi mental conjugate.....lol...lol....yuh know how fi link ....LOLOL....diss bredda nuh righted !

No X...it is YOU that is not righted. You are all over the place, one day LFC, nex' day City, nex' day Inter, nex' day Napoli, nex' day Newcastle, one day BR no know wha him a do, nex day him "astute", day afta dat him no know wha him a do, den u write the quadrilateral, the "new" same old "paradigm", incapable of understanding simple concepts e.g. wage bill/squad value correlation to consistent challenges for the title etc. etc. etc....LOL! Klown, you have been consistently "unright".

[Sir X]

Really , I commend you on getting an online dictionary to communicate and present your theory , wage bill ,squad value ,parity to increase value of a squad.

Now i see you have presented Data, that you are trying to link(conjugate) to a theory, 1st can you show me your theory in the above posts .Leave out the data...hehe .You do comprehend that conjuating does not mean you have presented or explained a theory ?

If you cant use mine....hehe..........Yuh righted , yuh ave sense , yuh guh school ? or hint !

Theory involves : a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based, which would lead you to examine the practice or practical: of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas

[Paul Marin]

Really , I commend you on getting an online dictionary to communicate and present your theory , wage bill ,squad value ,parity to increase value of a squad.

Now i see you have presented Data, that you are trying to link(conjugate) to a theory, 1st can you show me your theory in the above posts .Leave out the data...hehe .You do comprehend that conjuating does not mean you have presented or explained a theory ?

If you cant use mine....hehe..........Yuh righted , yuh ave sense , yuh guh school ? or hint !

Theory involves : a set of principles on which the practice of an activity is based, which would lead you to examine the practice or practical: of or concerned with the actual doing or use of something rather than with theory and ideas

Now here's an exercise. Find any two people of reasonable intelligence. Now, read them out loud what you just wrote. Then come back and tell me what they said and how well they comprehended your dissertation. Was further explanation required by you? No lying now. And by the way, "linking" and "conjugating" are not synonymous. You need to go back to grammar school. Secondly, the theory is simple, and it is supported by the data you agreed was fact. You have advanced no argument to disprove my theory. Now, run along and do your assignment. You are failing class once again.

[Sir X]

Lets deal with 2nd ,did I say I disagreed with the data ? although I could question some of its validity .

You have not presented a theory to disprove , more so data ? Can you present a theory !You are trying to sell data as theory, link,conjugate,mix up , blend , obfuscate.

Which proves you have a comprehension and presentation problem and its not the 1st , like you didnt understand that net spend is a crucial component of finance,that cannot be seperated.

[Paul Marin]

Lets deal with 2nd ,did I say I disagreed with the data ? although I could question some of its validity .

You have not presented a theory to disprove , more so data ? Can you present a theory !You are trying to sell data as theory, link,conjugate,mix up , blend , obfuscate.

Which proves you have a comprehension and presentation problem and its not the 1st , like you didnt understand that net spend is a crucial component of finance,that cannot be seperated.

I do not have a comprehension problem. I have a problem with trying to decipher your hieroglyphics. Learn to write a proper sentence, then present your position because as currently written it is utter gibberish and totally incomprehensible. To wit, what the hell are you trying to say here?

My "theory" - for the 1,000,000th time - "To *consistently* challenge for the league title year over year, a team will need a wage bill and squad value on par with its rival clubs with the highest wage bills and squad values."

I have already given data points that support it:

*no team outside the top 3 in squad value and wage bill has won the Prem except for Leicester

*Second, in the RA era, squad value in all the winners, (Leicester again being the outlier), has increased through acquisition.

*Third, with a few exceptions (e.g. Chelsea last year, Manu** two years ago), the top 4 most valuable clubs have always qualified for European football (Europa or UCL) but only the top 3 in value (certainly in the RA era) consistently have been challenging for the title.

End of story. You are clearly at a comprehension deficit as this is not the first time that I have presented this argument. Now - go and do your homework - get someone to read your posts and see how incomprehensible your grammar is - go back to grade 3, you mussi did start smoke crack from then. LOL!!

[Sir X]

This is what you initially presented,as you see,you left out net spend,makes a huge difference when you are talking about wage bill and squad value doesn't it,it calls into question finances,how that value is attained and maintained.

Negative spend or positive spend is NOT the issue, and have questionable impact on winning ONE title. How many times have I told you that WAGE BILL and SQUAD VALUE ****PARITY**** is what is important to CONSISTENTLY challenge for the title.



It would lead you to examine my theory as more plausible.Your theory NOW makes sense though general ,mine seems more inclusive of your parameters....InThe Above...hehe.


Clap yuhself CLAFFY.

[Paul Marin]

This is what you initially presented,as you see,you left out net spend,makes a huge difference when you are talking about wage bill and squad value doesn't it,it calls into question finances,how that value is attained and maintained.

Negative spend or positive spend is NOT the issue, and have questionable impact on winning ONE title. How many times have I told you that WAGE BILL and SQUAD VALUE ****PARITY**** is what is important to CONSISTENTLY challenge for the title.



It would lead you to examine my theory as more plausible.Your theory NOW makes sense though general ,mine seems more inclusive of your parameters....InThe Above...hehe.


Clap yuhself CLAFFY.

Look in the mirror - I have said this 1,000,000 times the exact same thing. The issue of POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE net spend is only relevant to gaining parity. For example, Rafa had a negative spend and is still managing a squad more valuable than his nearest rival. And I have always said having a good manager is essential, but useless without the finances. That's why I said Pep can't save Sunderland. And for the record, I have NO IDEA what your "theory" is. It is a comprehension problem I have with reading hieroglyphics.

[Sir X]

Look in the mirror - I have said this 1,000,000 times the exact same thing. The issue of POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE net spend is only relevant to gaining parity. For example, Rafa had a negative spend and is still managing a squad more valuable than his nearest rival. And I have always said having a good manager is essential, but useless without the finances. That's why I said Pep can't save Sunderland. And for the record, I have NO IDEA what your "theory" is. It is a comprehension problem I have with reading hieroglyphics.

Leff it alone nuh man , you were doing good ....but regression is in the blood ..hehe

The issue of POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE net spend is only relevant to gaining parity. For example, Rafa had a negative spend and is still managing a squad more valuable than his nearest rival.


* It is always relevant
* Because it plays a huge part in the wage bill
* It is used to asses squad value - not the final determination (the final being competitive performance over a season).

.....My Lawwd

[Paul Marin]

Leff it alone nuh man , you were doing good ....but regression is in the blood ..hehe

The issue of POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE net spend is only relevant to gaining parity. For example, Rafa had a negative spend and is still managing a squad more valuable than his nearest rival.


* It is always relevant
* Because it plays a huge part in the wage bill
* It is used to asses squad value - not the final determination (the final being competitive performance over a season).

.....My Lawwd

As usual - you miss the point. Relative to my theory - it is only relevant to gaining parity. If you have zero net spend, or negative net spend, it is not relevant unless it affects parity relative to top rivals. So Rafa's negative spend did not affect Newcastle's parity relative to nearest rivals, ergo, not relevant. Understand? Simple.