Thing is though, as with all employers, TM has got credit in the bag in the form of the first half of the season so he'll last until next year surely.. SP's good run in the Wilson era was long gone by the time the rot had terminally set in; he'd eroded all his previous credit and had nothing to fall back on. That's the difference.
As I posted elsewhere, TM still has a 40% win ratio overall - SP had 32%. That's part of your answer as to why they won't get rid.
Another stat
Mowbray's average points, first 23 games v remainder;-
Middlesbrough
11/12 - 1.91 vs 1.13
12/13 - 1.75 vs 0.78
Coventry
15/16 - 1.87 vs 0.9
We need to sack him early on and preferably just after a 5 or 6 nil win.That gives me hope that he can pick up again at the beginning of next season (like he did in season 2 at Middlesborough). Looks like we might need to part company in xmas 2016 though
Just to confirm, Wiki says his record is P55 W20 D17 L18 as of yesterday's game - is this correct / up to date?
So Nick, TM started well and then went down hill, SP started well and then went downhill and so has pretty much every manager we have brought in for as long as I can remember. Some didn't even get the honeymoon period.
How are we going to change the club for the better and beat the rot by doing the same thing we have failed by doing since we dropped out of the premier league? How does it fix the problem? It clearly doesn't.
"TM has no plan B" "He's clueless and can't change anything" "He's too stubborn to change his system" All things posted over and over by fans here, but that sounds a lot like the problem out club has got. No fucking plan B.
Plan A is use the honeymoon period and hope hes the perfect manager then sack him when he starts to lose. Plan B is stick with it and try and bring some stability to the club for a change, maybe we need to use a plan B.
Mowbray is the better manager, but I would fancy Pressley to get the better out of this squad than TM has.
However, Pressley probably wouldn't have managed to attract the names Mowbray has.
Yeah, like that Alex Ferguson. Took him 5 years to win the league with United, even losing out to an average Leeds team in 1992. Useless.If it wasn't for the three times of nose diving out of the play-offs I would be 100% behind the bloke and would just put it down as one of those things.
But three times? Has he learnt nothing?
If he stays I'll back him, but am more than half expecting exactly the same thing to happen again next season.
Once bitten, twice shy. Twice bitten more fool you. Three times bitten you need to get rid of the dog.
Sent from my LG-D405 using Tapatalk
Yeah and like in 1992 there was the same 12-18 month management merry-go-round we have nowadays wasn't there.Yeah, like that Alex Ferguson. Took him 5 years to win the league with United, even losing out to an average Leeds team in 1992. Useless.
What every club does is not relevant. What successful clubs do is. Man United, Chelsea and Liverpool doing great these days with these constant changes of managerYeah and like in 1992 there was the same 12-18 month management merry-go-round we have nowadays wasn't there.
That is 24 years ago! Rightly or wrongly managers are given so much less time and besides, Ferguson is a very, very rare example.
No comparison. Every club pretty much these days give their managers 18 months max.
It's a fair point, Pressley did ok when he had decent players (which he inherited). His problem was that his recruitment was so awful that Pressley basically built a league 2 squad in his final season here.
Mowbray has made a few mistakes recently in the market but on the whole the recruitment and scouting has been tenfold better with Mowbray and Venus than Pressley and that is the main thing that sets them apart at the moment.
The saving grace for Mowbray at the moment is the team that done so well until January was one that he built almost from scratch. Given another summer window, I still believe he can build a squad who can improve again next season
Yeah and like in 1992 there was the same 12-18 month management merry-go-round we have nowadays wasn't there.
That is 24 years ago! Rightly or wrongly managers are given so much less time and besides, Ferguson is a very, very rare example.
No comparison. Every club pretty much these days give their managers 18 months max.
What every club does is not relevant. What successful clubs do is. Man United, Chelsea and Liverpool doing great these days with these constant changes of manager
As it is, we're 10th and that's not a sackable offence, despite the recent poor run.
Surely it is when you think how far clear we were of 7th?
Surely it is when you think how far clear we were of 7th?
Its terrible, and that change in form often would be sackable.
But sacking him 6 weeks ago might have done something for our season, it wont make a blind bit of difference now so why bother make the change. Instead lets build towards stability, he's got his second summer to bring in more players that suit his game style and dump the dead weight. TM getting the sack will help no one, we need to buck the trend and make a change by not ripping the manager out without even a full season.
So, as long as we are clear of relegation and in no danger of going down it's okay if we lose 15 games in a row?It's irrelevant, Nick. It's like saying if we'd started bottom and finished 12th, he should have been sacked for the part where we were bottom of the table. Or would he be a hero for getting us to mid table>?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?