Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Just a look at the changing  performance over his half seasons. So back half of 10/11 then each subsequent half season.

 

The trendlines are quite clear for goals scored and games lost.

 

Not sure at what point stability is supposed to reverse the tend.

 

But aye, theyre on @mikeashleylies timeline too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

B3xYsWfCMAAkqv7.png

 

Are there any other examples to compare?

 

Looking at stability and the lack of evidence for the benefit.  The notion that after 10 years of mid-table stability a manager will then shoot up the league is bogus.

 

Any long serving manager tends to peak within 5 years and maintain that level or be sacked when they drop off.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The worst part of that for me was feeling the pain of losing again.

 

 

The worst part for me is that I don't feel any pain losing. 5 wins on the bounce meant nothing to me because we've seen this all before.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Aye...

 

Newcastle goalkeeper Tim Krul has been ruled out for up to six weeks with an ankle injury.

 

The Netherlands international suffered ligament damage during training ahead of Saturday's 1-0 defeat at West Ham.

 

Rob Elliot deputised at Upton Park and is now set for an extended run in the side.

 

Manager Alan Pardew confirmed the news at a press conference ahead of Tuesday's Premier League trip to Burnley.

 

Krul is expected to miss a string of key fixtures including a Tyne-Wear derby with Sunderland, as well as a Capital One Cup quarter-final at Tottenham.

 

More to follow.

 

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11678/9588529/premier-league-newcastle-goalkeeper-tim-krul-facing-six-week-lay-off-with-ankle-injury

Link to post
Share on other sites

B3xYsWfCMAAkqv7.png

 

Are there any other examples to compare?

 

Looking at stability and the lack of evidence for the benefit.  The notion that after 10 years of mid-table stability a manager will then shoot up the league is bogus.

 

Any long serving manager tends to peak within 5 years and maintain that level or be sacked when they drop off.

 

 

 

Super-small sample size so it probably doesn't matter, but the trend seems to be that stability results not in higher league position but rather in more consistent league position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

B3xYsWfCMAAkqv7.png

 

Are there any other examples to compare?

 

Looking at stability and the lack of evidence for the benefit.  The notion that after 10 years of mid-table stability a manager will then shoot up the league is bogus.

 

Any long serving manager tends to peak within 5 years and maintain that level or be sacked when they drop off.

 

 

 

How would Redknapp at Spurs work?  Or is he a bad example given that Spurs have arguably got worse since he left?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very rarely anyone claims stability is a guaranteed way to acheive success, and they also don't claim that an average manager will suddenly become good. Generally they mean that sacking multiple managers over a short time causes chaos and probably won't work, and also that managers should be given a decent length of time to prove themselves. It's a fairly common sense argument really.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be a daft thing to caution against as we approach half a decade under one manager then.  08/09 levels of flux are clearly bad for a club, but that's got no baring whatsoever on our current state.

 

If you appoint the right man in the first place you don't get those levels of flux.  You only have to keep sacking them if you repeatedly appoint dickheads.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be a daft thing to caution against as we approach half a decade under one manager then.  08/09 levels of flux are clearly bad for a club, but that's got no baring whatsoever on our current state.

 

True, stability argument really doesn't apply to NUFC at the moment, except if you're happy to always finish mid table and aren't prepared to risk that for progress. Except if you're Mike Ashley basically.

Link to post
Share on other sites

B3xYsWfCMAAkqv7.png

 

Are there any other examples to compare?

 

Looking at stability and the lack of evidence for the benefit.  The notion that after 10 years of mid-table stability a manager will then shoot up the league is bogus.

 

Any long serving manager tends to peak within 5 years and maintain that level or be sacked when they drop off.

 

 

 

How would Redknapp at Spurs work?  Or is he a bad example given that Spurs have arguably got worse since he left?

 

8th, 4th and 5th place finishes.  Don't think it matters what a team does once a manager goes, but don't think he was there long enough to be used as an example.  If he was though, it would just be another example of someone who peaked in year 2 of his reign and offers no credence to the notion that sticking by a manager offers anything other than continued performance at the level they set early on at best, diminishing returns otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

B3yW7giCAAAR0wH.png

 

Once again Pardew gets some new players and lifts results.  He's done this to a lesser extent year on year every season.

 

Looking at December, I think it's safe to say the last 10 games before the next window will fit right into that lower section too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...