I am going to start by saying that we may just have to agree to disagree, but I cannot disagree strongly enough with this.
First, clubs don't agree with any of what you've just said. Every Premier League club, and in fact, most lower-league clubs in England (and across Europe for that matter) feel that statistical analysis of games and players is a vital component of how they prepare for matches and recruit players and managers. They all have people who go through the data that Opta and others provide, and match it up with video clips.
So, it's not an American fad, despite what mouthbreathing morons like Martin Samuel like to think because math has terrified them since primary school.
To rebut one specific point you make though, this: It realy doesnt matter if you have 2 shots or 10 and win 2-0, its 3 points. If anything you are a better team if you score more with less? is completely untrue.
Yes, you've won the game. But will you win the next one playing the same way? You might be able to win on only two shots, but that means that you can guarantee you will score, on only those two shots, and you can stop any number of shots your opponent takes from going in. The reality in football is that baring a major difference in talent between the two sides (like say, Barcelona vs a non-league team of paraplegics), that isn't the case. No one, not even Diego Maradona at his cocaine-inspired peak, is going to score every time on each shot, or every other shot. The best can manage perhaps 2 in 10 (which is roughly where Messi is at). So, if you're counting on scoring off one 1 or 2 shots, you're going to score once every 5 games or so.
The best teams create more shots, and win through volume. There is no team on the planet who has shown an ability to be better than average at conversion over the long term, bar the absolute top sides (Barcelona, Real Madrid and Bayern Munich). And they are only slightly more efficient (like 2 goals every 10 shots versus 1.5 goals every 10 shots).
So, yes you might have won 2-1 scoring on only 2 shots. But do that again. And again. For 38 games. No one can. So how you play matters.
That's where all these stats that those of us in this thread are talking about come from. It's about measuring what's happened, and looking for predictive patterns that show what is likely to happen next. And then taking those patterns and applying them to how a team plays so that they can make tiny improvements, or cut out bad choices by recognizing what works, and what doesn't.
Good teams consistently shoot more than their opponents, and shoot from places on the pitch that are more likely to lead to the shot going in. They also pass in ways which are more likely to lead to those better quality shots. This is a universal truth across the game. Every league features the same kinds of teams at the top. Good players also have similar patterns. And by measuring them, teams can sort of get an idea of what to look for when scouting replacements.
That doesn't mean they don't use scouts and only use spreadsheets. Spurs head of Player Identification uses stats and video to filter out players who aren't able to do what we want. Then he and others scout the hell of out them in person to watch the things which the data doesn't show, to find the best possible fit.
Pochettino did this to figure our Eric Dier could play DM for us. Guardiola uses data to figure out what tactical changes he wants to make during matches. The data gives you the idea of how you play, so you can figure out what changes you need to make to win more. The eye-test matters because you can see in real life what's going on. The data matters because it lets you look at things you may have missed because you can't see everything at once.
