Norwichcity78 0 Posted November 9, 2013 I was looking last night to see what the stats were for Chris Hughton for Norwich and to be honest they are only just better than the worst manager we have ever had.......Glenn Roeder!! People were very quick to get on his back due to his results so im surprised to see so many people happy to still back Chris Hughton?Chris Hughton = 57 Games / 18 Wins / 16 Draws / 23 Loss = 31.58 Win PercentageGlenn Roeder = 65 Games / 20 Wins / 15 Draws / 30 Loss = 30.77% Win Percentage70015700000000000007001180000000000000700116000000000000070012300000000 Would be good to know your views on this Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Block E Buh 0 Posted November 9, 2013 CH record is Prem only where as GR was championship. But, you could argue they had different budgets to spend but then you could argue GR budget for the division was very good. Stats can be turned to how you want them to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tetteys Jig 830 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="M.A.T.T"]CH record is Prem only where as GR was championship. But, you could argue they had different budgets to spend but then you could argue GR budget for the division was very good. Stats can be turned to how you want them to.[/quote]Exactly, Hughtons remit was to keep us up which he did, Roeders was to take us up and he pretty much did the opposite. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zak Van Burger 0 Posted November 9, 2013 Oddly, when accurately using your particular yardstick of win percentages Glenn Roeder turns out not to be the "worst manager we have ever had", Messrs Gunn, Hamilton, Megson and Deehan all achieved lower win percentages than this and that''s just off the top of my head. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*** 0 Posted November 9, 2013 Anywhere else and he''d have been shown the door. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gingerpele 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="First Wizard"]Anywhere else and he''d have been shown the door.[/quote]Actually, no.And if you believe that you are very very naive.Hughton wasn''t appointed as a temporary stop gap. He was appointed as the man too take NCFC forward long term. That means if he suffered a bad patch the bored would support him. They decided he''s the man for the job, and until the relive him of his duties still believe he is the man for the job.Why on earth wouldn''t they sack him if they didn''t? They won''t accept relegation just to not sack a manager they appointed to not look bad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*** 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="Gingerpele"][quote user="First Wizard"]Anywhere else and he''d have been shown the door.[/quote] Actually, no. And if you believe that you are very very naive. Hughton wasn''t appointed as a temporary stop gap. He was appointed as the man too take NCFC forward long term. That means if he suffered a bad patch the bored would support him. They decided he''s the man for the job, and until the relive him of his duties still believe he is the man for the job. Why on earth wouldn''t they sack him if they didn''t? They won''t accept relegation just to not sack a manager they appointed to not look bad.[/quote] This is one hell of a long bad patch GP. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gingerpele 0 Posted November 9, 2013 But it isn''t Wiz, not really.Its very frustrating, i''m not ''happy'' with how things are at the moment. And maybe getting rid of Hughton is the right thing. But we achieved our target last season, thats all the bored really care about. Stoke put up with Pulis for a few years despite no one liking his style of football.It happens. And its really no good complaining at every opportunity. Not to say you can''t complain, but some people and i''m very much including you in this go way too far. What happens if we went and won the next three games? Which to be honest wouldn''t be that surprising in one respect because if we do turn it around it''ll more than likely be in some silly fashion. Would 17 points after 13 games be acceptable? (In a purely theoretical situation) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dubai Mark 0 Posted November 9, 2013 This is now getting worse than being tortured, how many more ways can be found to have a crack at Chris Hughton, we get it, we got it a long time ago, we understand the situation and we just have different opinions that''s all, so.... ENOUGH....I can''t take any more!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 9, 2013 First Wizard stats :-Times actually supported Norwich City - 14Times subsequently changed mind to withdraw support - 13Mind changed once it was proven he was talking carp - 486Flounced off and closed account - 1Additional accounts - 14Report button hit - 263Managers heads called for - All of them Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*** 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="morty"]First Wizard stats :-Times actually supported Norwich City - 58-59 years.Times subsequently changed mind to withdraw support - 13Mind changed once it was proven he was talking carp - 486Flounced off and closed account - 1Additional accounts - 0Report button hit - 0Managers heads called for -just the failing ones.[/quote] I just took the liberty to make a few corrections. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
City 2nd 191 Posted November 9, 2013 For goodness sake Gzp, it''s BOARD!The BOARD may be BORED watching NCFC, but they are sticking with CH, so they must be RELIEVED!,!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="morty"]First Wizard stats :-Times actually supported Norwich City - 58-59 years.Times subsequently changed mind to withdraw support - 13Mind changed once it was proven he was talking carp - 486Flounced off and closed account - 1Additional accounts - 0Report button hit - 0Managers heads called for -just the failing ones.[/quote] I just took the liberty to make a few corrections.[/quote]I shall add :-Times when totally factually incorrect - 2659753So your corrections statistically are likely to be tripe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
*** 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="morty"][quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="morty"]First Wizard stats :-Times actually supported Norwich City - 58-59 years.Times subsequently changed mind to withdraw support - 13Mind changed once it was proven he was talking carp - 486Flounced off and closed account - 1Additional accounts - 0Report button hit - 0Managers heads called for -just the failing ones.[/quote] I just took the liberty to make a few corrections.[/quote]I shall add :-Times when totally factually incorrect - 2659753So your corrections statistically are likely to be tripe.[/quote] Now there I was thinking this was all about Hughtons stats.[:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 9, 2013 No Wiz, the whole forum is about you, so technically it is impossible for me to go off topic when I am taking the mickey out of you.[:)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Holtcantshoot 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="City 2nd"]For goodness sake Gzp, it''s BOARD!The BOARD may be BORED watching NCFC, but they are sticking with CH, so they must be RELIEVED!,!!!![/quote]I''d assumed that "The bored" was the new name for the collective of fans of football teams manager by Chris Hughton. "We are fans of Norwich, we are one, we are the bored." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clint 221 Posted November 9, 2013 To give it a bit of perspective, I think we need to bear in mind that 4 of Hughton''s meagre 18 wins came against lower league opposition in the cup, Scunthorpe, Doncaster, Watford and Peterborough and one of the losses was at home to Luton.I would think on league form alone, Hughton''s record is possibly worse than all other managers in our recent history? With by far the biggest budget and best squad at his disposal, of course. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Masked Raccoon 0 Posted November 9, 2013 Worst manager in recent times strangely finishes in highest league position for donkeys years, beating the position of his replacement. Comfortably beating Man U & Arsenal at home in the process.Yep, stats can be twisted any which way you want.Want him to win quite a few games between now and xmas to amend those stats and stop such posts appearing when the going gets tough.Pant wetters! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Warren Hill 0 Posted November 9, 2013 Good point Clint! On league form alone Hughton led us to our highest finish in 20 years. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helsinki canary 242 Posted November 9, 2013 Clint hits the nail on the head, biggest budget ever, technically best squad ever, results awful= failure of manager and coaches to train, motivate and tactically develop the team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="Helsinki canary"]Clint hits the nail on the head, biggest budget ever, technically best squad ever, results awful= failure of manager and coaches to train, motivate and tactically develop the team.[/quote]Playing in the hardest league in the world, after having spent pretty much the average amount of all teams.Two sides to every coin. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Clint 221 Posted November 9, 2013 Warren, surely you can only beat what''s put in front of you? At their respective levels, I would think all other managers in our recent history would have a better win ratio. Yes, statistics can be misleading so maybe a better statistic would be to find out if there is another current manager in the premier league with a worse premier league record?Also, yes we finished 11th last season but with less points than we had the season before so that in itself could be deemed to be misleading. You also seem to be forgetting the here and now...we are 18th, we have scored the joint least amount of goals (with Palace) and only Sunderland and Palace have conceded more. Surely you''ll struggle to argue against those statistics? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iron_stan 0 Posted November 9, 2013 stats or no stats its cr@p to watch, we dont score goals and cant defendthe man is tactically ineptforever tarred as clueless chris Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Helsinki canary 242 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="morty"][quote user="Helsinki canary"]Clint hits the nail on the head, biggest budget ever, technically best squad ever, results awful= failure of manager and coaches to train, motivate and tactically develop the team.[/quote]Playing in the hardest league in the world, after having spent pretty much the average amount of all teams.Two sides to every coin.[/quote]Indeed 2 sides to every coin, finally only one side will count and be remembered and that will be the side where the results can be seen Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,534 Posted November 9, 2013 What is the purpose of comparing Hughton''s stats with past managers? If there is one I can''t see it! Maybe it''s because if you compare them with the managers he''s in direct competition with no case can really be made? 9 premier managers finished below him last season. But this season there''s only 2 at present. Judge him on that. Or if you''re going to judge his whole record at Norwich and you don''t somehow accept the official league tables then a good comparison would be Paul Lambert who has been at Villa exactly the same amount of time. Hughton has won 18/57 31.58 while Lambert has won 20/58 34.48%. If we''d won that cup match they would be level. If that''s the difference between success and failure then it''s small margins indeed. All this rather blows out of the water Wiz''s theory that it wouldn''t be tolerated elsewhere and also begs the question what was the OP trying to prove? But of course if we discount the 10 game run, games where the opposition were on the beach and games where the players were rebelling ............. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="Helsinki canary"][quote user="morty"][quote user="Helsinki canary"]Clint hits the nail on the head, biggest budget ever, technically best squad ever, results awful= failure of manager and coaches to train, motivate and tactically develop the team.[/quote]Playing in the hardest league in the world, after having spent pretty much the average amount of all teams.Two sides to every coin.[/quote]Indeed 2 sides to every coin, finally only one side will count and be remembered and that will be the side where the results can be seen[/quote]The side that will count will be the one at the end of the season.[:)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zak Van Burger 0 Posted November 9, 2013 [quote user="nutty nigel"]Hughton has won 18/57 31.58 while Lambert has won 20/58 34.48%. [/quote]Good stat. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Barclay seats 4849 the 3rd 0 Posted November 9, 2013 THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! [quote user="Dubai Mark"]This is now getting worse than being tortured, how many more ways can be found to have a crack at Chris Hughton, we get it, we got it a long time ago, we understand the situation and we just have different opinions that''s all, so.... ENOUGH....I can''t take any more!!!!! [/quote] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites