Last Five NCFC Managers Compared: Statistics

[Account Closed 0]

The recently published performance comparisons of our managers seemed inadequate to me, such that it was not possible to form an objective opinion, particularly so when emotions are riding as high as they are right now, I  therefore compiled a more rigorous, fresh set of statistics from scratch and share them with you here. I used the current managers record of 19 games as a reference period for a common base with which to compare  past managers.You will see that the first 19 games, last (Sacking) 19 games and overall total games are tabulated for each of the five managers.I omitted the interim games between appointments that were under the control of stand in managers ( Jim Duffy etc) for the few games they controlled and included only the games which the newly appointed permanent manager could realistically influence.I then used a spreadsheet to calculate the running averages of points per game for each manager as summarised in the table below.I am not sure these statistics tell us much when considering the many unquantifiable factors acting invisibly alongside the numbers however some benchmark has to be used in every business so here they are.I am not offering an opinion here, only offering the numbers and would love to read your opinion as to if the statistics show us anything at all.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Bryan Hamilton From 5 April 2000  To 4 Dec 2000Total Games 31Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.12 First 19 games 1.16 Last 19 games  1.21 Nigel Worthington From 4 Dec2000 To 2 Oct 2006Total Games 280Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.44 First 19 games 1.21 Last 19 games  1.37 Peter Grant  From 16 Oct 2006 To 9 Oct 2007Total Games 54Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.22First 19 games 1.42Last 19 games  0.84Glenn Roeder  From 30 Oct 2007 To 14 Jan 2009Total Games 65Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.15First 19 games 1.79Last 19 games  0.89Bryan Gunn  From 16 Jan 2009 To PresentTotal Games 19Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.05First 19 games 1.05Last 19 games  1.05:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::Full table showingG  W   D   L  Win%  PPGuploaded tohttp://i42.tinypic.com/ig93lw.gif

[Big Slob 0]

Just shows how shockingly badly Gunn actually did, Even Peter Grant and Hamilton did better, and they were bad enough!!

[Account Closed 0]

The full table image at http://i42.tinypic.com/ig93lw.gifmay have to be entered directly into your browser as this is sometimes blocked direct from the forum.

[Rick 0]

Its a minor point but as BG himself went to such great lengths before the Barnsley match to state that he was not the manager then one could agree his record is:

Bryan Gunn  From 23 Jan 2009 To Present
Total Games 18
Rolling Average Points per Game
Overall 0.94
First 18 games 0.94
Last 18 games  0.94

[Superflash 0]

In fairness to Gunn, Grant had a better squad and even Roeder had Lita for a time. Out of all those managers I''d say Gunn easily had the worst squad and smallest transfer kitty to work with.

[spudgfsh 0]

a few other stats for you with a rank out of the 24 clubs in brackets afterwards

Clean sheets: 9 (23)

Goals conceded: 70 (22)

Goals Scored: 57 (10)

 

these three stats explain it all to me we were scoring enough goals (despite the fact that OG was second top)

[Paul Spector 0]

[quote user="Superflash"]In fairness to Gunn, Grant had a better squad and even Roeder had Lita for a time. Out of all those managers I''d say Gunn easily had the worst squad and smallest transfer kitty to work with.[/quote]

Precisely. Easy to criticise though, isn''t it?

[Account Closed 0]

[quote user="Superflash"]In fairness to Gunn, Grant had a better squad and even Roeder had Lita for a time. Out of all those managers I''d say Gunn easily had the worst squad and smallest transfer kitty to work with.[/quote]That may or may not be true, either way any managers role is to get the very best, plus that little bit extra, out of the players that he has and that is how he must be judged.Another factor to consider is that our current manager was an integral part of the inherited team building process, albeit wearing a different hat.Each of the five managers had unforeseen difficulties arise and had to overcome them, furthermore it could be argued that our current manager had a unique advantage over his predecessors inasmuch that he knew in detail what weaknesses needed prioritising before accepting the post.I am of the opinion that whatever decision is made, the post should be re-advertised and Brian Gunn invited to apply as would be the case in any business facing an operational or financial crisis.

[CabbageArmyLoyalist 0]

How can you possibly base it on 19 GAMES!!!!!!!!

 

such as the other managers who managed Norwich for years! F''in dumb sh*ts.

[Two Tails 0]

heh Worthys stats still hold up quite strong.

[Muffles 8]

If you want more stats - for a team alledgedly struggling to score this year, our top scorer only getting 7 and our second top scorer being a tie between Clingan and ''own goals'', we were actually the 10th highest scoring team in the division, even getting more than Birmingham! Trouble is, only Charlton and Watford conceded more than we did.

As with the first poster in this thread, no opinions, just facts.

[AJ 1,218]

http://i42.tinypic.com/ig93lw.gifFixed link for you all [:)]

[ZLF 271]

We all know new managers have a honeymoon period - Bryans factually was shorter and more ineffective than any of the previous 4;  3 off whom are abject failures and he gained 10% fewer points per game than any off them.

He will only get worse,  and the stats on  this occassion are backed up with the evidence on the pitch.

Roeder got the sack following 5 defeats in his last 6 games (he only had 2 homes games) ;  the same should apply to Gunn.

[Account Closed 0]

[quote user="AJ"]http://i42.tinypic.com/ig93lw.gifFixed link for you all [:)][/quote]Thank you for the link fix - appreciated

[Badger 0]

[quote user="Getalife"]Bryan Hamilton From 5 April 2000  To 4 Dec 2000Total Games 31Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.12 First 19 games 1.16 Last 19 games  1.21 Nigel Worthington From 4 Dec2000 To 2 Oct 2006Total Games 280Rolling Average Points per GameOverall 1.44 First 19 games 1.21 Last 19 games  1.37 [/quote]It also shows that both Hamilton and Worthington had better records for their last 19 games than their first - suggesting some form of improvement.Perhaps we sacked them too soon? Or perhaps carefully selected sstatistics can be misleading?

[Graham Humphrey 13]

[quote user="CabbageArmyLoyalist"]

How can you possibly base it on 19 GAMES!!!!!!!!

 

such as the other managers who managed Norwich for years! F''in dumb sh*ts.

[/quote]The only one who managed for years on that list is Worthington.

[They need to EARN the right to play us 0]

So your statistics show that of those managers only Roeder had a greater immediate positive impact than Gunn. Good stuff.

[In Dubious Battle 0]

[quote user="Two Tails"]heh Worthys stats still hold up quite strong.[/quote]He has the best overall total and bear in mind he had a season in the premier league, would be interesting to see his stats for the championship alone?He also had the highest points average of any of them at the point of being sacked. Whilst i understand why he was sacked given the sh*t that has followed perhaps it would have been better if he''d stayed?

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="6th May 1939"]So your statistics show that of those managers only Roeder had a greater immediate positive impact than Gunn. Good stuff.[/quote]

Look at the "first 19 games" points per game average. Then try again.

[Account Closed 0]

[quote user="CabbageArmyLoyalist"]

How can you possibly base it on 19 GAMES!!!!!!!!

 

such as the other managers who managed Norwich for years!

[/quote]

How indeed - nevertheless that’s precisely what has to be done right now and  what the concern is about.

Unless you can see what the results are going to be a season ahead then decisions have to be made on the information available at the time. As  ZippersLeftFoot  pointed out in this thread,  historically a managers first quarter results do have a bearing on what follows thereafter and these statistics support that fact.
What we can examine here is the impact value Bryan''s appointment had on performance to date and compare that to the impact values of previous managers.
Chairman  Roger Munby publicly stated Bryan''s results short term would not act against his chances of getting the post permanently, owing to the dire circumstances he inherited, which is a fair statement; but only fair if it could honestly be said in the same breath that had the brief tenure resulted in more favourable results then those results would also not influence the decision making process and of that I have grave doubts. Ask yourself this, if we had escaped relegation- would the credit for that also be attributed to the previous regime? I think not.
This issue must not be about one person but more about the hopes and dreams of tens of thousands of people in our community and beyond and for that reason alone an emotionally based decision would be simply unforgiveable and unbelievably incompetent.

As Brian repeatedly states, he can do the job and who knows maybe so, but it just isn''t enough to hold down the job, what is needed here is more of a messiah who can do a very special job, an exemplary job from someone who has already cut his teeth elsewhere.

For those who believe Brian is the right man but not believe that simply owing to an allegiance of  fondness for him as a person, then I would ask you what could be your objection to him winning the post in a competitive interview, if only to show openly that the decision was made meritoriously and not an act of cronyism.

[They need to EARN the right to play us 0]

Hamilton last 19 games 1.21 points per game.

Worthington first 19 games 1.21 points per game. That represents no improvement.

Worthington last 19 games 1.37 points per game.

Grant first 19 games 1.42 points per game. That represents an improvement of 0.05 points per game.

Grant last nineteen games 0.84 points per game.

Roeder first 19 1.79 points per game. An improvement of 0.95 points per game.

Roeder last nineteen games 0.89 points per game.

Gunn first 19 games 1.05 points per game. AN improvement of 0.16 points per game.

[Mister Chops 7]

Let''s look at "positive impact" in a basic sense - points won per game.

Oh look, Gunn''s rubbish - and we''re relegated.

[Two Tails 0]

Handbags at dawn.DRAW