Hall Of Fame
So SM is one win different in a very small sample and there has been some very very close games in there. Is he out of his depth? Probably. But it’s still a very small sample size.Originally Posted by Bohinen
SM still needs to play those sides we beat 5-0 under Luke for a fairer comparison. Luke also had a lot more time to understand the players.
Recruitment has been poor, we didn’t even try and improve the one area that we needed to in the summer. And are suffering for that and will do until we resolve it. That won’t be this season.
Hall Of Fame
SM was on a hiding to nothing when he came in. Well respected manager left (just in time IMO), team at the start of a poor run, poor defensive record, key players injured, predictable system sussed by most teams, apparent lack of confidence across the team. Other than the job being a chance for him it makes you wonder why he took it? Not sure if he can turn things around but can't really fault him for taking a punt at the job.
Hall Of Fame
And probably one reason LW left as he could see even more trouble ahead than he was already experiencing and didn't want to end the season looking like a poor coach.
Hall Of Fame
Garbage.
He was given a good opportunity close to home and he took it. Who wouldn't. he earnt it.
If we were 15 points clear at the top I still reckon he would have taken it.
Hall Of Fame
If we'd stuck with Fullarton for the following season, he *might* have turned things around. If we had say 50 parallel universes and had the fixture list for 2016/17 come out in a different order for each one, he could have had a good start with an early run of games against sides who ended up down at the bottom and got some momentum going. There's enough random variables in the game for anything to happen in spite of a manager's shortcomings, luck plays it part which is why there's such a thriving betting industry advertising relentlessly on sports channels.
The board *could* back him to the hilt next summer to increase the odds of Maynard turning things around, but we're at the stage now where Allardyce is the only previous Notts manager to recover from a start this bad and go on to be a success.... and he had to do it after we'd got relegated. In pure mathematical terms this would be a unique turn around and on top of that - most seem to agree that he doesn't seem to have the personality either.
He won't continue to be this bad indefinitely, a 0.50 PPG ratio is 23 points over 46 games and you hardly ever see a club perform that badly over a season (the current bottom 2 have already surpassed that), but if we want to be challenging for promotion I cannot see this guy delivering.
Hall Of Fame
It is not that straight forward though as how many times has a new manager come in mid way through the season with a team in the promotion play off slots at Notts? Was it Gary Brazil after Allardyce? He didn't last long in the permanent role. When Allardyce came in we were already screwed and down. Your post is basically justifying the theory of lies lies and statistics! BTW I say we give him until the end of the season and go from there. His interviews are quite awful and concern me a bit but we don't have a lot to lose this season now.
Hall Of Fame
As someone mentioned earlier, threads like this do no good for the soul as it is a reminder that over my 45 years of supporting, I've witnessed some real rubbish managers at the Lane!
Always surprises me how high someone like Keith Curle is on lists like this. My resounding memory from his period was...we were bloody boring...so surprised to see how well we actually did on reflection.
Hall Of Fame
I can think of three, in or around the promotion spots mid-season.
Harry Parkes taking over from Jimmy McMullan, sacked the following season 9 places lower than he started.
Ronnie Fenton taking over from Jimmy Sirrel, sacked two years later and 15 places lower.
Gary Brazil taking over from Allardyce, reverting back to coach at the end of the season 6 places lower.
The future is always unknown and this game does throw up surprises, the best predictions we can make are based on probabilities (past scenarios) and a hunch based on vibes he gives off as a person and there's nothing there to suggest Maynard can be a success after the start he has had. Spending can have an impact, but we've seen managers backed before who have still failed. I think Man Utd have spent more than Man City have in recent years, for example.
Hall Of Fame
I can only speak to one of them which is Brazil after Allardyce. And yes Brazil was really not the best.
Thing for me with Maynard is that after a few years I have thrown myself to trust the process! I don't usually do things like that to be honest. So I am still hoping he works out. We have nothing to play for now really so at least he gets a free hit for a few games and then in game 43 if we are in the poo Warnock is hired we get new manager bounce and he finally retires a hero. Ha Ha.
Hall Of Fame
Here's a challenge, have there been other owners in football whose first 2 managerial/H.coach appointments both left mid-contract to take up positions 2 leagues higher?
I think it'd be a struggle to find another example.
The point of the question? Explains why fans went along with the 3rd appointment despite it not seeming right (to many, not all). They'd earned the benefit of the doubt. But now we're undoubtedly in Meatloaf territory now with 'Two out of three ain't bad' (I'd link to a video of the song, but I think we've suffered enough recently).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote