Well the one time he managed in the prem, he took over Middlesbrough - an established premier club - and relegated them.
They werent established and he finished 12th in his first season, Middlesborough have been a yo-yo team for years.
The only other managerial evidence we have is England. My point here being, we have beaten: Panama, Tunisia and Sweden. Look at it this way, did you expect us to beat him? Would you say it was not good enough if we had lost to them? Ofcourse, these are poor sides.
We didn’t beat Colombia in 120mins and I’m sorry but you can’t give a manager credit for winning a penalty shootout, likewise he shouldn’t deserve criticism if they
The one time we did come across a half decent team - Belgium (reserves!) - we lost without landing a punch on them.
Also England reserves with 8 changes, more than Belgium made, some would consider this managing the squad, which is working really well as we go in to the Croatia game with no injuries whereas Croatia have quite a few injury problems
Has he been able to take England above a standard expected of that team? Have we beaten a team that are deemed better than us? No, and so he can’t yet be measured against top quality managers until he achieves this. It’s great that we have gone so deep into the tournament but we can’t ignore that we have had the easiest route in history!
I agree we've had an easy route through other than Columbia, who we should have beaten in 90mins to be fair, but we've fallen against easy teams in the past and this time we haven't, which is a measure that he's better than the majority of England managers since Bobby Robson when it comes to competion play.
My post in response to the OP, is that we wouldn’t be as far forward as we are with CW, as I believe Wilder to date has more evidence of his managerial quality than Southgate.
