Would you employ this manager?

[Buddy Repperton]

All irrelevant really as we all know who will ultimately decide - Chansiri/Paixo.

 

* sits down and places hands over eyes! 

[Guest Grandad]

[areNOTwhatTHEYseem]

54 minutes ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Nope - we've had the opposite

 

We've had people saying Monk should be judged on results alone no matter what mitigating circumstances exist like lack of coaching staff, lack of spending, FFP, EFL, Points deductions etc etc

We've had the same about Jordan Rhodes and his lack of scoring

Day in day out day in day out we've been told it's results only that matter

So I post some results and say 'here you go then - explain  why you would want THIS manager' and all of a sudden everyone's like 'yeah but you can't just judge on results alone'

 

 

(note - I fully expected this - it's no different to everyone denying they were calling for The Cowleys to come here last time, after they imploded into failure dust at Huddersfield)

 

Yes, but not everyone has been doing this.

 

Both you and I have tried to discuss Monk's tenure in a more balanced way at times.

 

We could always do the same with other managers?

[Guest hk_owl]

2 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

We've had people saying Monk should be judged on results alone no matter what mitigating circumstances exist like lack of coaching staff, lack of spending, FFP, EFL, Points deductions etc etc

 

Relax! No one ever suggested your beloved Monk should have been sacked based on results before he became manager of SWFC... the sensible ones, however, looked at what he put on the pitch... the results... and the league table... and were justified in calling for his removal.

 

You’ll get over it. But you really can’t criticise Nigel Pearson’s record as Sheffield Wednesday manager yet. Maybe if he gets the job, and is as bad as Monk... then we can comment...

[GMOwl72]

Managers live or die by the results they get and/or the trophies they win. It’s a results business and in reality is the only way to judge someone with cold hard stats. If you win games you have relative success and if you lose you will be in trouble.

 

The thing is managers always get jobs in the game even if they are dogger. Monk will be back working in some capacity sooner rather than later so in-effect stats don’t necessarily prevent you from getting work but they can push you out of the door. 
 

 

 

 

[OwlsfaninNorway]

18 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

Here's a managers record over the last three clubs he's managed

 

It shows how many games we won, drew, and lost, how many players he used in that time, and then (crucially) his points per match record

 

What do you think?

Should we go out and get him?

 

Ps - here's Garry Monk's points per game record as comparison

 

 

Those last 3 years would have held you afloat in the PL the last 3 seasons. Even though it were to be numbers from the PL it would not be sufficient to me to appoint the person. I'd be more like wondering if he has had multiple promotions from the Championship.

[The Night-Owl]

15 hours ago, 33 said:

Can't see someone like Pearson working with DC.

On top of his previous comments about managing in Sheffield and recent health issues it seems an unlikely pairing.

 

Similarly any other 'Name'...

 

So we will either dipping into the unknowns from Europe... please NO.

 

Or we are looking at the likes of Cook, Cowley or Lowe who are amongst only a few with any sort of record, be it mixed, recent or lower league success and hope they can operate at a higher level.

 

Be taking a punt again but won't we in any circumstances.

 

LOWE for me in this situation.

 

Cook and Lowe are interesting ones, I don't think we can attract the likes of Pearson or Howe in the current climate, especially with how poorly we're run as a club. That's why realistically I can see us getting someone like Lee Johnson. 

[sage owl]

16 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

 

 

Nope - we've had the opposite

 

We've had people saying Monk should be judged on results alone no matter what mitigating circumstances exist like lack of coaching staff, lack of spending, FFP, EFL, Points deductions etc etc

We've had the same about Jordan Rhodes and his lack of scoring

Day in day out day in day out we've been told it's results only that matter

So I post some results and say 'here you go then - explain  why you would want THIS manager' and all of a sudden everyone's like 'yeah but you can't just judge on results alone'

 

 

(note - I fully expected this - it's no different to everyone denying they were calling for The Cowleys to come here last time, after they imploded into failure dust at Huddersfield)

Who’s your choice  ?.

[hirstys_achilles]

20 hours ago, Hitcat said:

Wouldn't touch Pearson in a million years. Poor record and a nasty piece of work to boot.

Not in my experience. Met him a few times and always been friendly and polite. 

[doubled123456]

22 hours ago, @owlstalk said:

 

EXACTLY

Nobody would

Nobody in their right minds would 

No Chairman with an ounce of knowledge/experience would