Is Dave Jones a man only set out for life near the top?

[Leaping Lannys Perm]

I've tried to keep my distance with the Jones bashing, though I do admit that I am beginning to think it's time for a change, but something he said in his RS interview yesterday got me thinking.

He pointed out that he had spent most of his managerial career at near the top of the league, so he must be a good manager.This got me wondering, what is his record like near the bottom of the league?

As far as I can tell, he has only spent 3 seasons near the bottom of the league and his record is as followed:

Southampton 1998-99 - "Their form seriously dipped in 1998–99 as they were rooted to the bottom of the table for much of the first half of the season, but they again avoided relegation on the last day of the season after a late run of good results, helped by the intervention of Latvian Marian Pahars and old hero Le Tissier"

Southampton 1999-2000 had to step down in January due to defending himself against the child abuse allegations. To that point, Southampton were in the bottom 3 and had only won 5 games in more than half a season. Southampton eventually got rid of him despite him being found completely innocent of all charges.

Wolves 2003-04: relegated in 20th (last) place with only 8 wins all season and 0 away from home.

So what does this tell us? Well it depends on the angle you look at it from. In fairness to DJ, all of these teams were expected to be relegation strugglers. But on the other hand he didn't exactly perform heroics in any of these seasons.

On the one hand, he has managed to pull off one relegation escape. But he has a habit of teams going on nosedive runs to get them into trouble in the first place. Lets not also forget the 2002 side that threw away a MASSIVE lead to blow promotion.

So what can we draw from this? I know a spin doctor like Jones would point out, perhaps rightly, that he was working in very tight situations with these teams, but his record at the bottom end of the table can hardly be considered sparkling. Perhaps the reason he has spent most of his life at the top of the league, is because he's had the money and resources to be there. As soon as he has to fight, it could be argued that he loses.

Anyway what do you lot think? Debate away.

[Ever the pessimist]

Was thinking about this the other day in relation to the somewhat tiresome Megson / Jones comparisons (so tiresome I am going to add to them!), I think GM is a scrapper who will be good near the bottom end and at turning clubs around when they are in a mess. Jones' calmness is probably good for teams near the top as he can transfer that little bit of calm that is needed to stop players getting carried away and make sure they continue doing what they have clearly been doing right previously. Sadly such calm is not what is needed in our predicament, and will also be seized upon by fans as a reason for such struggles.

Just my opinion mind.

[Flat Owl]

Not the kind of manager to get us out of the situation he has got us into...

Can MM afford to gamble on [another] last day win or bust game?