Best boss?

[Guest Kagoshimaowl]

4 hours ago, poite said:

With Antonio in the side he was trying to change the style of play wasn't he. 

 

Unlike some more recent managers megson knew exactly what we were missing and that the style we were playing wasn't going to work. 

 

Do I know for a fact that he would have got us promoted. No I don't. Nobody does. But he gave Dave Jones all the tools he needed to get the job done. 

 

Oh and my other point would be that Jones had less to do with our turnaround than Terry Burton. When Burton left Jones was utterly clueless. May as well had me in charge. Everything turned around again when Stuart Gray came in. Someone else to tell him what to do. 

So Megson was ‘trying to change’ a style that he had spent almost a year creating? That’s absolute bobbar mate and you know it.  Meggo had lost the plot which is why he screamed at Milan and got himself fired, and rightly so if he told his BOSS where to go. I do agree with you about Terry Burton being influential when he was here though and I do think Jones was lucky to get us on the run he did but I stand by the fact that I’d don’t think we’d have been anywhere near with Gary in charge.

[optimisticowl]

As the eternal optimist I’ve got to believe that it’s Jos, he inherited a mess of injured and ignored players and has managed to start the recovery process. Many thanks to all of our managers over the last 20 years, but history doesn’t win football matches, I’m rooting for Jos. 

[CraigSGM]

1 hour ago, Kagoshimaowl said:

Just a question mate...did you enjoy the football under Megson? I certainly didn’t. We roughed teams up and scored from long throws and set plays only.  Nothing wrong with being good in those departments but when you play football like Wimbledon in the early 90s then that’s not for me I’m afraid.

 

You can only manage with what you have though, and what Megson had was a squad of mid table League One players. No manager in the world would have had that lot playing free flowing, expansive football. He figured out a way to win games with a poor set of players by managing what few strengths they had.

 

That's the sign of a good manager. 

[poite]

47 minutes ago, Kagoshimaowl said:

So Megson was ‘trying to change’ a style that he had spent almost a year creating? That’s absolute bobbar mate and you know it.  Meggo had lost the plot which is why he screamed at Milan and got himself fired, and rightly so if he told his BOSS where to go. I do agree with you about Terry Burton being influential when he was here though and I do think Jones was lucky to get us on the run he did but I stand by the fact that I’d don’t think we’d have been anywhere near with Gary in charge.

I could be off the mark with this but if memory serves me right we lost ben Marshall and that had a massive impact on the team. I think it was during the spell without Marshall that we lost those games in a row which led to megsons sacking. I think Antonio was a replacement for Marshall because we couldn't get him back. 

 

If that's correct I'd have been interested to see where megson would have got the team.

 

That could be wrong though. I can't be bothered to go looking through the stats to confirm it tbh. 

[room0035]

Best manager based on what he had to work with has to be Stuart Gray he had a team full of kids loan players and free agents, the pitch they got to play on was not too dissimilar from a sand pit.

 

You look at our fully fit squad today and 5 or our strongest 11 are free agents signed by Stuart Gray,

 

If our chairman had not be quick to bring in CC and waste the money and Stuart was still in charge now, we would be a lot stronger, with a young well drilled hungry team, with players bought and improved and not a club losing £20m+ a season and having to sell the silverware to stay within FFP.

 

Many many mistakes have been made by DC but his biggest was not retaining Stuart Gray as manager.

[trevdi9]

28 minutes ago, poite said:

I could be off the mark with this but if memory serves me right we lost ben Marshall and that had a massive impact on the team. I think it was during the spell without Marshall that we lost those games in a row which led to megsons sacking. I think Antonio was a replacement for Marshall because we couldn't get him back. 

 

If that's correct I'd have been interested to see where megson would have got the team.

 

That could be wrong though. I can't be bothered to go looking through the stats to confirm it tbh. 

from what I heard Megson wanted both Marshall and Antonio and MM said no that is when the profanity from Megson happen'd  that said no one knows the why's and wherefores of the situation or the same whether Megson could get us promoted or not so I believe that is a mute situation  ,and as for Dave Jones , Ryan Lowe stated that all he did was let the team play with freedom well that is fair enough because it worked ,there was no magic formula It was Megsons team that largely got us promoted,so i'm going for Megson  , And if true what other manager we have had chased a player to the airport  halted his departure and got him to sign for us ,

[Athelwulf]

21 hours ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Erm to be honest with what he had to work with Stuart Gray.

 

Yes, I agree.

 

He took a team almost assured of relegation and rescued it.

 

Had he not done that, then it's unlikely that Chansiri would have come in.

 

The following season he secured a mid-table spot with resources which would normally see a club in the bottom six.

 

People will argue about whether he's the best, but his dismissal was certainly the most unjust.

[Athelwulf]

21 hours ago, SimonJ said:

If it's win percentage in last 20 years, then statistically it's Megson.

 

Notwithstanding that, best for me is Carlos (2015-16 season only.....) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Megson/Jones were in charge of the biggest club in the division.

 

Our resources were bobbish compared to those of United and Charlton at the time, but they were still large compared to the vast majority of the division's clubs' assets.

 

When assessing how good a manager is, first you have to decide where your club ranks in the particular division resources-wise.

 

Then you compare that with final league placing.

 

That promotion season we were probably third or fourth in terms of resources, but finished second.

 

So Megson/Jones were just above par.

 

Gray was in charge of a team which was probably ranked 19th at best in terms of resources, yet finished 13th.

[Guest Kagoshimaowl]

2 hours ago, CraigSGM said:

 

You can only manage with what you have though, and what Megson had was a squad of mid table League One players. No manager in the world would have had that lot playing free flowing, expansive football. He figured out a way to win games with a poor set of players by managing what few strengths they had.

 

That's the sign of a good manager. 

Good point mate. Still wouldn’t have got us promoted though which was my original point which got unfairly negged!

[Guest Kagoshimaowl]

2 hours ago, poite said:

I could be off the mark with this but if memory serves me right we lost ben Marshall and that had a massive impact on the team. I think it was during the spell without Marshall that we lost those games in a row which led to megsons sacking. I think Antonio was a replacement for Marshall because we couldn't get him back. 

 

If that's correct I'd have been interested to see where megson would have got the team.

 

That could be wrong though. I can't be bothered to go looking through the stats to confirm it tbh. 

I gave you a thumbs up for this. All good points to be fair. We may just have to agree to disagree on this one!

[robswfc]

Carlos

[Pale Rider]

15 hours ago, Dutch McLovin said:

Big Ron wasn't in the last 20 years ??

Laws football was better but Gray had a worse team. So for me gray gets the nod 

Ron was manager second time 1998 to me that’s 20 years 

[pgmetcalf]

The Big Boss? 

 

[Blue and white]

10 hours ago, Kagoshimaowl said:

Just a question mate...did you enjoy the football under Megson? I certainly didn’t. We roughed teams up and scored from long throws and set plays only.  Nothing wrong with being good in those departments but when you play football like Wimbledon in the early 90s then that’s not for me I’m afraid.

As the holy bible written by our lord says, Its all about winning.

I promise you this. we would not have bottled 2 play offs under him.

[vulva]

Howard Wilkinson. Years ahead of his time. Built a top 6 side on a shoe string budget. People forget just how tight we were with money. 

 

Lot of time for Big Ron, Sturrock, Laws and Carlos. 

[vulva]

Didn’t read the last 20 years bit. 

 

All things considered, Laws. Him publically taking his name off them court papers gives him the casting vote. 

[katie melua]

An absolute no brainer

 

Brian Laws

 

How we finished in the positions we did under him, were nothing short of miraculous. We finished 9th, 16th and 12th yet had a ridiculous low wage budget, had three quality players in Whelan, Brunt and Bougherra sold without being able to reinvest, boardroom unrest and takeover offers that would be found in the junk mail section of an everyday persons email account.

 

The season we finished 9th produced some of the best football we played in that decade from 2000-10. Then the following season, we somehow managed to survive despite losing the first 7 games on the trot - not many other clubs survive from that start. This even included having the likes of Enoch Showumni on loan

 

Finally the season we finished 12th under him, despite having kids at the back for most of the season. The double over Sheffield United. The signing of Michael Gray who was a huge, huge help to Thomas Spurr. 

 

Given what he had to work with, he's by far the best manager we've had since relegation from the prem and the last 20 years. The results away at Exeter and Stevenage as an example would not have happened under his watch!

 

It was a shame it ended up as it did for him. Worked wonders with peanuts did Laws. Also, his reaction to seeing his name on the court papers was a proud moment. Stood up against the board and removed his name from the list. Did he offer his resignation if the club refused to take his name off the list, can't remember?

 

Only miracle worker Sturrock could come close to him given he had far less to work with than Laws. I'll never forget going to Plymouth Argyle without any strikers, yet somehow winning 2-1. Then came round 189345 of the chairman v trust as we had no money to bring in a player on loan yet somehow money was found for Lloyd Sam only a few days after the trust offered 25k towards a loan signing. 

Edited September 11, 2018 by katie melua

[TomtheOwl95]

Jos.

[Swiss Toni]

Depends really as it can't all be perceived by what happens on the pitch. The likes of Jones and Luhukay did/seem to be doing good work behind the scenes with the structure, set up and youngsters whereas on the flip side the football in the first season under Carvalhal was good but he ended up ripping the heart out of the club.

 

I tend to like what we did under Gray and Laws as an overall picture and Lubukay is still work in progress but the positive signs are there.

 

Some managers come and go but it's potentially work done behind the scenes that then gets passed to a different manager who could then reap the benefits.

 

Edited September 12, 2018 by Junk Smuggler

[Guest Kagoshimaowl]

9 hours ago, Blue and white said:

As the holy bible written by our lord says, Its all about winning.

I promise you this. we would not have bottled 2 play offs under him.

Probably not but wouldn't have made them in the first place though!