The difference in divisions where you win is pretty important. Warnock in the Champ vs Warnock in the Prem. Mind you, he's a tool anyway....
Discounted goalies on basis they're apparently all mad according to the old saying. (apart from Zoff - Italy)
Id say that it was all relative cos you can only beat the teams infront of you. your attackers against the same level defenders.
True but there's those that can win in the Champ and can't in the Prem (Warnock, Dyche, McCarthy) And then those who can do both (Howe, Pulis, *shudder* Pearson)
Gary Monks an ugly ginger **** and he can **** off now. If the worst happens and Brucey goes and we appoint Monk I will be playing the Bob role.
You said any manager with a win rate over 40% was 'exceptional', what do you think Bruce's win ratio is with us?
I'd ****ing love to have Ian Holloway, he'd bring attacking football, motivate the players and bring much needed sense of humour.
Anyone who thinks we're too good for Monk or Sherwood because they were sacked for not winning enough is a tard. If they were winning enough at Swansea and Villa they'd be good Premier League quality managers well within our reach. I mean, if Leicester finish in the bottom half next season and Ranieri gets the sack (very unlikely in any scenario), we'd never turn our nose down at him. Some City fans really have an over-inflated sense of how big or good we are because we've spent a grand total of four years in the top flight out of our 102 year history. Get over yourselves. We'd be lucky to get someone like Monk, Sherwood or even Allardyce for that matter. We were lucky to get Bruce; unfortunately, he did what he does at most clubs he's managed and start off great and go downhill.