Andrew 4660 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Even I place no stock in those stats. Apples and oranges. but a lot of those managers (including KK) managed us in both divisions so they still have validity hughton only managed us for 8 games in the PL as has been said if his stats are still above 53% (assuming we've gone up) after next season, then ill be impressed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Seems only fair to make a comparison when he's no longer manager. Around November then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Seems only fair to make a comparison when he's no longer manager. Around November then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Even I place no stock in those stats. Apples and oranges. but a lot of those managers (including KK) managed us in both divisions so they still have validity Are you saying that having the best win-ratio in 2nd tier makes him more successful than coming 2nd in the top flight then? Quite an interesting definition of 'success' that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinofbeans 91 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Hardly a wind up. Facts are facts, though I have severe doubts about him at a higher level. Was martin Jols assistant when he got spurs up to 5th though so there is some value in his coaching methods perhaps…. I think he'll be a billy davies esque coach/ manager.... gets a team up then gets fired! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Hardly a wind up. Facts are facts, though I have severe doubts about him at a higher level. Was martin Jols assistant when he got spurs up to 5th though so there is some value in his coaching methods perhaps…. I think he'll be a billy davies esque coach/ manager.... gets a team up then gets fired! No one is disputing the win-ratio are they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Hasn't had nearly enough games. You can't say he's been more successful than KK or Sir Bob etc, because he hasn't been manager as long as they had. Stats aren't the be all and end all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted February 24, 2010 Share Posted February 24, 2010 Stats aren't the be all and end all. Don't plame the stats mind, blame Rob for manipulating them as he has. Here they are in context.. Top Tier Managers Kevin Keegan 54.98 George Martin 49.03 Sir Bobby Robson 46.66 Glenn Roeder 45.83 Graeme Souness 44.82 Kenny Dalglish 38.46 Jim Smith 36.36 Ruud Gullit 34.61 Willie McFaul 33.57 Sam Allardyce 33.33 Jack Charlton 31.25 Kevin Keegan (2) 28.57 Joe Kinnear 22.22 Alan Shearer 12.5 Second Tier Managers Chris Hughton 56.25 Arthur Cox 44.97 Gordon Lee 37.83 Bill McGarry 31.35 Richard Dinnis 30 Osvaldo Ardiles 21.27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holden McGroin 6298 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 Wheres keegan's 2nd tier stats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 You can't say he's been more successful than KK or Sir Bob etc orly? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christmas Tree 4460 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 You've also got to consider the circumstances under which he's worked as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 Tbf I agree. It's so hard to judge any manager with the morons who are running this circus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brock Manson 0 Posted February 25, 2010 Share Posted February 25, 2010 You can't say he's been more successful than KK or Sir Bob etc orly? ya rly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Wheres keegan's 2nd tier stats? Just on the promotion seasons, not including the back end of 91/92 when Keegan inherited the shit or the 08/09 when Hughton inherited the shit.... Hughton P51 W32(62.75%) D13(25.49%) L6(11.76%) = 2.13 points per game Keegan P53 W32(60.37) D11(20.75%) L10(18.86) = 2.01 points per game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 9580 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Wheres keegan's 2nd tier stats? Just on the promotion seasons, not including the back end of 91/92 when Keegan inherited the shit or the 08/09 when Hughton inherited the shit.... Hughton P51 W32(62.75%) D13(25.49%) L6(11.76%) = 2.13 points per game Keegan P53 W32(60.37) D11(20.75%) L10(18.86) = 2.01 points per game That's what really is bothering me: Just looking at the stats and records from last season is misleading and makes the squad and games look far too good. It's a really shame that the likes of Smith, Ameobi and Nolan as well as Ashley and Lambiarse can now say they did better than Keegan and his squad in 1992/93. Disgusting tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Wheres keegan's 2nd tier stats? Just on the promotion seasons, not including the back end of 91/92 when Keegan inherited the shit or the 08/09 when Hughton inherited the shit.... Hughton P51 W32(62.75%) D13(25.49%) L6(11.76%) = 2.13 points per game Keegan P53 W32(60.37) D11(20.75%) L10(18.86) = 2.01 points per game That's what really is bothering me: Just looking at the stats and records from last season is misleading and makes the squad and games look far too good. It's a really shame that the likes of Smith, Ameobi and Nolan as well as Ashley and Lambiarse can now say they did better than Keegan and his squad in 1992/93. Disgusting tbh. I think Hughton should be congratulated for doing every bit as well as Keegan tbh. Just in the second division. We fondly remember attractive, free scoring world beaters in '93 but complain about last season being effective at best....but the goal difference was better last year as well as the win, draw and loss ratios. Obviously Hughton started with a squad that should have been good enough for the Premier League in the first place, and Keegan started with one that was heading for the third division. But by the same token, Hughton had to cope with actually being relegated and his squad being ripped apart, wheras Keegan wasn't relegated and was given cash to spend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMoog 0 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Lol, stats can be made to say whatever is needed but they're not the be all and end all because there are outside influences and other contributing factors which can affect the final result. Anyone who thinks Hughton is anywhere near as good as Keegan is either a muppet or a wum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 From the Keegan tribunal: 5.2 The Club admitted to the Tribunal that it repeatedly and intentionally misled the press, public and the fans of Newcastle United. That's not from the tribunal by the way. that's what Keegan said in his statement after the tribunal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 If you take wins in competitive games (and leave out John Carver who ran the club for 1 sucessful game) Hughton comes top of ALL our managers since we 1930 (before that it was a committee) Hughton 56.76% KK 54.98% Martin (47-50) 49.03% SBR 46.66% Roeder 45.83% Cox 44.97% Souness 44.82% Mather (35-39) 43.57% Livingstone (54-56) 43.43% Cunningham (30-35) 41.83% shite statistics and a waste of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donaldstott 0 Posted May 14, 2010 Share Posted May 14, 2010 Lol, stats can be made to say whatever is needed but they're not the be all and end all because there are outside influences and other contributing factors which can affect the final result. Anyone who thinks Hughton is anywhere near as good as Keegan is either a muppet or a wum. It's like comparing chalk and cheese. I'm not sure how well Keegan would cope in the situation Hughton found himself in (i.e. no money and a squad in mental tatters). Likewise, we'll probably never know what Hughton could do with all the money he wants and a Premier Division in which it was a damned sight easier to get results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob W 0 Posted May 16, 2010 Author Share Posted May 16, 2010 If you take wins in competitive games (and leave out John Carver who ran the club for 1 sucessful game) Hughton comes top of ALL our managers since we 1930 (before that it was a committee) Hughton 56.76% KK 54.98% Martin (47-50) 49.03% SBR 46.66% Roeder 45.83% Cox 44.97% Souness 44.82% Mather (35-39) 43.57% Livingstone (54-56) 43.43% Cunningham (30-35) 41.83% shite statistics and a waste of time the statistics are accurate of course - what you mean is that YOU don't like them PS he's on 61.54% now............................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasepud 59 Posted May 16, 2010 Share Posted May 16, 2010 *makes mental note to resurrect this thread in December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 16, 2010 Share Posted May 16, 2010 If you take wins in competitive games (and leave out John Carver who ran the club for 1 sucessful game) Hughton comes top of ALL our managers since we 1930 (before that it was a committee) Hughton 56.76% KK 54.98% Martin (47-50) 49.03% SBR 46.66% Roeder 45.83% Cox 44.97% Souness 44.82% Mather (35-39) 43.57% Livingstone (54-56) 43.43% Cunningham (30-35) 41.83% shite statistics and a waste of time the statistics are accurate of course - what you mean is that YOU don't like them PS he's on 61.54% now............................... I can quite easily reel off some REAL and RELEVANT statistics if you like ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted May 16, 2010 Share Posted May 16, 2010 *makes mental note to resurrect this thread in December. yes. File this in the "hold" pile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asprilla 96 Posted May 16, 2010 Share Posted May 16, 2010 *makes mental note to resurrect this thread in December. yes. File this in the "hold" pile. Presumably, you and Pud will be ing in the streets when we lose our first games then.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now