Sick of karanka? | Page 9 | Vital Football

Sick of karanka?

Pope John XXIII said:
What numbers do you want specifically?
Click to expand...
Not sure what CP wants but just look at average points per tenure, then average points of the last ten and first ten games after a change.

I saw similar stats for the Prem when they did a piece on it and they proved that by and large, new manager bounce was a fallacy. There are always exceptions but a good squad will remain a good one and a bad one likewise unless there is a window handy...
 
Basha73 said:
Not sure what CP wants but just look at average points per tenure, then average points of the last ten and first ten games after a change.

I saw similar stats for the Prem when they did a piece on it and they proved that by and large, new manager bounce was a fallacy. There are always exceptions but a good squad will remain a good one and a bad one likewise unless there is a window handy...
Click to expand...
I'm at the zoo at the moment so will have a look when I get back.

Hard to see how the first 6 games of Davies II where we won about 6 in a row, don't count as a bounce. Or the start of Pearce's reign. Or the 6 wins out of 7 (I think, haven't checked it) that Freedman got. Or even Davies Mk I, where we won about 3 in a row immediately.

But of course the effect is temporary, hence a bounce.

I can accept a statistical analysis that says it in general doesn't exist. But to pretend it never happens is false IMO
 
paz1967 said:
Theres about 1% not happy with the boss looking at every avenue. Why are we even having this debate with retards? That's half the problem with the world, is that normal people keep responding to them rather than ignoring them
Click to expand...

So we're back to the "anyone who doesn't agree with you is a retard" syndrome ? As I've said, I don't want him sacked, but it would be understandable if he was. We have spent £25m and only Grabban of this summers signings is showing value for money so far.
 
no, im talking about the minorities with big gobs and low IQ's in general on many subjects.

with regards the manager and whether he is useless or not, I likely would listen to the forest away fans that go and support most games and sing and support and chant his name. If they to a man turn around and state, we have supported you but yer shit. Then id respect that. It seems the opposite to that right now

25 million has paid for the entire squad in reality., despite it being top heavy on individuals.
 
Last edited:
Pope John XXIII said:
I'm at the zoo at the moment so will have a look when I get back.

Hard to see how the first 6 games of Davies II where we won about 6 in a row, don't count as a bounce. Or the start of Pearce's reign. Or the 6 wins out of 7 (I think, haven't checked it) that Freedman got. Or even Davies Mk I, where we won about 3 in a row immediately.

But of course the effect is temporary, hence a bounce.

I can accept a statistical analysis that says it in general doesn't exist. But to pretend it never happens is false IMO
Click to expand...

Theres likely to be a bounce in atmosphere which will get some results even if the football is non progressive. Then what counts is still the same things ten games down the line
 
Pope: Overall stats show that managers are usually sacked after a bad run - big surprise - and when a new manager comes in at best they return the club to the average amount of points the previous manager was earning prior to the bad run. Further to that clubs who had been brave enough to stay with a manager during a bad run actually saw a bigger long term net improvement than appointing a new manager.

Obviously results will change as each circumstance is different - ie Karanka got a big war chest compared to MW, PM, DF etc but it's an argument for retaining faith in a manager.

Logically if we'd really 'bounced' and improved each time we'd have been promoted long ago.

Basically stop bloody sacking managers!
 
Pope John XXIII said:
I'm at the zoo at the moment so will have a look when I get back.

Hard to see how the first 6 games of Davies II where we won about 6 in a row, don't count as a bounce. Or the start of Pearce's reign. Or the 6 wins out of 7 (I think, haven't checked it) that Freedman got. Or even Davies Mk I, where we won about 3 in a row immediately.

But of course the effect is temporary, hence a bounce.

I can accept a statistical analysis that says it in general doesn't exist. But to pretend it never happens is false IMO
Click to expand...
And that’s what tends to be borne out. After about ten or so games the ‘bounce’ flattens out totally to the point where usually the PPG is little different to what has gone before.

There are exceptions such as if the change happens during a window and there is a dramatic influx of players or if the quality of manager is vastly different but those are exceptions.

Pearce taking over, the bounce took a bit longer to flatten but it did.

Davies was a significant cut above Calderwood and was able to bring players in.

AK is a higher calibre than Warbs and had a window but their PPG weren’t that different by the end of last season and many people are commenting how little difference there is in points gained this season to last so far.

Obviously that is not the be all and end all - we have a better squad and are unlikely to be in a relegation scrap this season but at this stage of the season the points haul is not too dissimilar.
 
Marco Polo said:
:clown:
Click to expand...

Whose the clown? Everyone entitled to their opinion. I for one get less and less fussed with every manager. On the one hand I don't particularly like changing managers all the time giving no time to build, but on the other hand I think we are a long way from promotion with this team and part of the problem is AKs negative approach. Always trying to get a goal on the break or scoring and then trying to hang on / time waste. Leeds and the like come out expecting to dominate and win. They don't always manage it but that should be the mantra.
 
Lienking said:
Don't think AK should be sacked, but whatever his pedigree his performance here has been decidedly average. We aren't playing a formation that makes the best use of our players, we generally play with 7 players behind the ball, and we have signed numerous players who are having no impact (Tachtsidis, Goncalves, Dias, Ansarifard, Watson) and Carvalho has had less impact than Dowell. I suppose he has been unlucky that other signings have had little impact due to injury (Byram, Soudani, Dawson, Figuerido) . We also seem to be getting worse rather than better.

Would give him till the end of the season to see how things go, but it's no good sacking him at the end of January, when the window closes.
Click to expand...

I'm totally in agreement. Some poor signings and unlucky with others.

As you say, Carvalho had less impact than Dowell. Wish we'd gone back for Dowell in the summer.
 
If there is a new manager bounce effect it generally only lasts 5 or 6 games.
Maybe we should hire managers on monthly contracts then fuck them off ?
We'd be Champions of Europe (again) within a few years.
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Pope: Overall stats show that managers are usually sacked after a bad run - big surprise - and when a new manager comes in at best they return the club to the average amount of points the previous manager was earning prior to the bad run. Further to that clubs who had been brave enough to stay with a manager during a bad run actually saw a bigger long term net improvement than appointing a new manager.

Obviously results will change as each circumstance is different - ie Karanka got a big war chest compared to MW, PM, DF etc but it's an argument for retaining faith in a manager.

Logically if we'd really 'bounced' and improved each time we'd have been promoted long ago.

Basically stop bloody sacking managers!
Click to expand...
Yep, if each managerial change only had a net increase of 1 point then based on the 20ish managerial changes since Harry Bassetts 1997/98 haul of 94 points, we would be sitting top of the Premier League with a guaranteed 114 points a season by now (38 wins, 0 draws, 0 losses)
 
Calvin Plummer said:
Pope: Overall stats show that managers are usually sacked after a bad run - big surprise - and when a new manager comes in at best they return the club to the average amount of points the previous manager was earning prior to the bad run. Further to that clubs who had been brave enough to stay with a manager during a bad run actually saw a bigger long term net improvement than appointing a new manager.

Obviously results will change as each circumstance is different - ie Karanka got a big war chest compared to MW, PM, DF etc but it's an argument for retaining faith in a manager.

Logically if we'd really 'bounced' and improved each time we'd have been promoted long ago.

Basically stop bloody sacking managers!
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with your central point at all. We have had this debate generally a number of times and you know that I am not in favour of blindly supporting managers no matter what; but at the same time, where I feel a manager has the ability I will back them to the hilt.

And in general, I agree that changing manager more often than not has no positive effect (not always though).

Below are the first six games of managers since Ron Atkinson. In bold are mid season changes:

Ron Atkinson- LWLLLD
David Platt - LWDDLW
Paul Hart- DLWDLD
Joe Kinnear -DDDWWL
Gary Megson -LDDWDW
Barlow/McParland- WWDDWW (goes on to 6 straight wins
Colin Calderwood- WWWWDW
Billy Davies- WWWLDL
Steve McClaren- DLWDLL
Steve Cotterill- WWLWLW
Sean O'Driscol- WDDWDD
Alex McLeish- DLWDLL
Billy Davies- DWWWWW
Stuart Pearce- WDWWWD
Dougie Freedman- WWDWWW
Phillipe Montanier- WLLWWD
Mark Warburton- DDLWLL
Aitor Karanka- LWLLLD

So the overall look definately supports the assertion that changing managers does not make a difference. In several of these seasons changing managers has made us worse (both times sacking Davies for instance). However, a couple of times it has saved us from relegation -everything in 2004 and 2009 for instance.

I have highlighted in red managers where the first six games shows a clearly discernable 'new manager bounce'. But as others have said, this generally lasts for not much more than 6 games or so before form reverts to the average.

The exceptions to this come only where a notably better manager is appointed, Davies for instance) or where the previous manager was clearly causing upset within the squad (Cotterill picking up from McClaren, or Barlow from Megson ).

When the bounce does happen, it helps only where results generally pick up anyway or where a club is in a relegation battle and a good run of six results can work wonders
 
So a Dutch group of academics studied the leagues in Spain, Germany, Holland, England and Italy over a 20 year period.

The research looked at sacking a manager after a bad run or staying with him. There was virtually no difference - interesting Expected GPG stayed the same usually from the bad run to the 'bounce' - suggesting luck is often the biggest determinent. After the initial return to the mean there's still no difference in improvement. Obviously this can change, especially if circumstances do.
 

Attachments

  • _69326397_manager_sackings_464.jpg
    _69326397_manager_sackings_464.jpg
    15.3 KB · Views: 5
Season is gone now...not that I am too fussed with AK...at this point...let him finish the season...if we make the play offs thats good ...if not ...sack him at the end of the season...dont see much gain in doing it now..
 
MaltaRed said:
Season is gone now...not that I am too fussed with AK...at this point...let him finish the season...if we make the play offs thats good ...if not ...sack him at the end of the season...dont see much gain in doing it now..
Click to expand...

glad u r not in charge- giving up b4 new year and deciding to sack a manager making progress if he doesn't make the play offs this season. If this was next season I might support that but not when we have not completed half the season. Not really counting last season cos that was all about clean up after fookwas.

Don't think there is any outstanding team this season but there are half a dozen very good teams at this level and another half a dozen not far behind. We are one who is not far behind.

Once again injuries are causing a problem and we have not really got to play our first choice defense for a while now. We may still make the play offs cos there are so many points left to play for.

If we just finish in the top 10, while disappointed in not reaching the play offs, this will still be enough for me to support AK.
 
Hmm.

After years of competing at the wrong end of the table, I am reasonably content with overall progress.

If we have good ownership and investment within our means coupled with a manager consistently keeping us in or around the promotion race then I would be happy.

I look at Brighton and just think that they stuck with Hughton despite a couple of disappointments before they finally got promoted.

If AK doesn’t get us promoted this season but has progressed the squad and the style to the point where next season we will be challenging again then why would we change the manager?

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

We have tried the hire and fire with absolutely bugger all success. Let’s at least consider hanging on to a manager for a few years.
 
Basha73 said:
Hmm.

After years of competing at the wrong end of the table, I am reasonably content with overall progress.

If we have good ownership and investment within our means coupled with a manager consistently keeping us in or around the promotion race then I would be happy.

I look at Brighton and just think that they stuck with Hughton despite a couple of disappointments before they finally got promoted.

If AK doesn’t get us promoted this season but has progressed the squad and the style to the point where next season we will be challenging again then why would we change the manager?

They say insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

We have tried the hire and fire with absolutely bugger all success. Let’s at least consider hanging on to a manager for a few years.
Click to expand...
"They say instantity is doing the same thing over and over expecting as different result".
This principle could equally be applied to sticking with a failing manager. One who has been in charge for 12 months and had unprecedented resources for the club, yet has gained less points than Doggie Freeman in the same time period. As we know Doggie had to work in far more hostile environment. We can do better than Karanka now.
 
Jacksbadhobbits said:
"They say instantity is doing the same thing over and over expecting as different result".
This principle could equally be applied to sticking with a failing manager. One who has been in charge for 12 months and had unprecedented resources for the club, yet has gained less points than Doggie Freeman in the same time period. As we know Doggie had to work in far more hostile environment. We can do better than Karanka now.
Click to expand...
Yes they do say that, the idiots who have clsmmored for the heads of manager after manager. They do apply that principle, and we are still stuck in the midtable of the second tier of British football 2 decades after we decided 12 months is more than enough any manager needs to get us back in the big time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.