Was it? I suppose we amounted 3 more points than the previous season.Ironically, Ollie's team was improving as time was going by.
Was it? I suppose we amounted 3 more points than the previous season.Ironically, Ollie's team was improving as time was going by.
Got no problems with McClsren coming in if he wants it, seems you don’t approve then after digging up that RTID? You could go through a whole list of managers with indifferent stats but doesn’t mean they won’t succeed, probably needless to write or print that.
It’s not in chronological order, for some reason, so your point is wrong. Those stats are much better than I expected, and in a totally different league to Holloway’s. McLaren had a near 46% win rate in his last job, Holloway's highest ever win rate at any club was near 40%, with us in his first spell.Why don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
http://www.managerstats.co.uk/managers/steve-mcclaren/
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
It’s not in chronological order, for some reason, so your point is wrong. Those stats are much better than I expected, and in a totally different league to Holloway’s. McLaren had a near 46% win rate in his last job, Holloway's highest ever win rate at any club was near 40%, with us in his first spell.
Why don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
http://www.managerstats.co.uk/managers/steve-mcclaren/
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Stupidly missed that. They've put it in win rate order! That's rather more reassuring.It’s not in chronological order, for some reason, so your point is wrong. Those stats are much better than I expected, and in a totally different league to Holloway’s. McLaren had a near 46% win rate in his last job, Holloway's highest ever win rate at any club was near 40%, with us in his first spell.
In the context of what he's had to deal with i.e. FFP, no signings and blooding youngsters I'd say thats a significant improvement.Was it? I suppose we amounted 3 more points than the previous season.
His win rates at Derby weren't bad and he did well in Holland, a while ago though now.Why don't we look at some facts to drive our opinions?
http://www.managerstats.co.uk/managers/steve-mcclaren/
Not pretty reading I'm afraid. Unless I am mistaken, the graph looks fairly depressing and poses the question as to why The Board would actually want to appoint a man with that record? With every successive managerial post, without exception, his win rate has got worse.
Do you think we should print this off and post it snail mail to The Board as part of their 'due diligence'?
We've seen this so many times with managers and players. Either they or The Board believe it will be better this time at QPR. In this instance, history suggests it will probably not be so.
Ironically, Ollie's team was improving as time was going by.
What is worse about those stats in the loss percentage.Holloway first spell ...
G - 252 W - 100 D - 71 L - 81 W% - 40%
Second spell ...
G - 80 W - 26 D - 14 L - 40 W% - 33%
What is worse about those stats in the loss percentage.
50% defeats in Ollie's second spell would have been very worrying to the board.
Admittedly his league record was a tad lower, but would heve been at 50% if Brentford hadn't allowed us to score twice in time added on.
I may be wrong, but I feel that McLaren could be the person to develop Smyth, Eze etc. At least, that is my hope!
I thank Stan for mentioning the Notts County manager as a possible alternative & would add three others - Hurst (Shrewsbury), Tisdale (Exeter) & Crowley (Lincoln) with the Luton man also worth considering.
I gather from Ipswich supporters that Hurst is expected to join them after the play offs & if he is willing to go there, he would certainly be prepared to join us! The financial restraints are worse in Suffolk to West London!
McLaren career management stats:
P 619 W 278 D 147 L194 Win% 44.9
Holloway career management stats:
P 951 W 343 D 246 L 346 Win% 36.1
Looks like a significant upgrade to me, if it happens. Especially in win to loss ratio. The most worrying thing about McLaren is his Newcastle experience, which sounded truly disastrous with open player rebellion.
Holloway loses more games than he wins though.They both seem to lose about 1 in every 3 games.
I’m off down the shops for some fungal toenail syrup. Anybody wanna come?
McLaren career management stats:
P 619 W 278 D 147 L194 Win% 44.9
Holloway career management stats:
P 951 W 343 D 246 L 346 Win% 36.1
Looks like a significant upgrade to me, if it happens. Especially in win to loss ratio. The most worrying thing about McLaren is his Newcastle experience, which sounded truly disastrous with open player rebellion.
Again, progress can't just be counted in points.Was it? I suppose we amounted 3 more points than the previous season.
Holloway loses more games than he wins though.
Given our record with managers there is a huge chance that McLaren, if he comes, will be another **** up. He is certainly a mockable figure and has some worrying black spots on his CV. But the numbers look better than what we have had for the last couple of years, if it’s him let’s give him a chance.
Before we fall on him like a scurry* of rabid Shepherds Bush squirrels.
* the alternative collective noun for squirrels is, apparently, ‘dray’. So I have learned two new words this morning, it’s a good day already. You can also use ‘colony’ which is a bit dull. Why do squirrels need so many alternatives to describe a bunch of them hanging around looking menacing? I would like to see a war between the grey squirrel and urban foxes, in which both sides get wiped out.
No, it’s a beaver of fannies.Is it a fanny of beavers?