Worst manager in the history of SUFC

[Sothall_Blade]

Where are the statto's? Selly Oak (or anyone else) is this the worst managerial record after 17 games (or just an overall tenure) in the history of SUFC??

Yes, statistically it's by far the worst managerial record. Interestingly, several of our other worst ever managers have lost their job around the 16 to 23 game mark (Thompson, Heath, Peters).


Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson 17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%
24 Adams 18 2 4 10 0.56 11%

 

[super_pig]

>Yes, statistically it's by far the worst managerial record
FACT! .. and to my utter astonishment yesterday, we are now bottom!:thumbdown:

 

[Ollessendro]

Yes, statistically it's by far the worst managerial record. Interestingly, several of our other worst ever managers have lost their job around the 16 to 23 game mark (Thompson, Heath, Peters).


Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson 17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%
24 Adams 18 2 4 10 0.56 11%

Thanks Sothall (and also Selly Oak).

I rest my case. No further questions your honour!

(but honestly, how are people still defending this muppet???)

 

[Selly]

Thanks Sothall (and also Selly Oak).

I rest my case. No further questions your honour!

(but honestly, how are people still defending this muppet???)

Because (and say what you will about his signings) you cannot polish a turd.

 

[Grecian2000]

and say what you will about his signings

If the squad was so bad when he took over (and I'm not saying it wasn't), how in God's name has he actually managed to make it worse?

 

[Robbie]

If the squad was so bad when he took over (and I'm not saying it wasn't), how in God's name has he actually managed to make it worse?

I think this is the vital question.

We had a better record with a rookie manager, than we have with a squad that now has an experienced manager and some of his own players on top of what was previously available (Andy Reid being the only main difference really).

 

[JJ Sefton]

I think this is the vital question.

We had a better record with a rookie manager, than we have with a squad that now has an experienced manager and some of his own players on top of what was previously available (Andy Reid being the only main difference really).

He took over a pile of shit, dropped his keks, squatted over it, and crimped Collins and Doyle off on top of it.

 

[Revolution]

One thing that I haven't seen much comment on - because it gets lost in the gnashing of teeth about Doyle and Collins - is the form of specific players, as opposed to the team generally since Adams was appointed. As it see it:

Quinn is much improved under Adams, at least in recent weeks
Boggy has been more influential (but still not a consistent performer)
Lowton has arguably improved since Adams arrived

On the other hand:

Yeates has been frozen out and is terrible when he plays, expecially compared to when Reid was with him
Ertl has got worse
Williamson has acquired a tendency to get sent off to go with hardly ever being fit, and is played wide to accomadate lesser players
Parrino has disappeared off the face of the Earth, when he's arguably better than the players who have replaced him
Simonsen is arguably worse
Evans was a semi-regular scorer before Adams came in, but that has stopped

This is all subjective, of course, but one possible answer to the charge that it isn't Adams' fault given the poor squad is that on balance more players are playing worse than before under him.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

TO be fair to adams, Evans was not a regular goalscorer before reid came in the team and surprisingly enough, since reid left, evans isn't a regular goal scorer any more.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

One thing that I haven't seen much comment on - because it gets lost in the gnashing of teeth about Doyle and Collins - is the form of specific players, as opposed to the team generally since Adams was appointed. As it see it:

Quinn is much improved under Adams, at least in recent weeks
Boggy has been more influential (but still not a consistent performer)
Lowton has arguably improved since Adams arrived

On the other hand:

Yeates has been frozen out and is terrible when he plays, expecially compared to when Reid was with him
Ertl has got worse
Williamson has acquired a tendency to get sent off to go with hardly ever being fit, and is played wide to accomadate lesser players
Parrino has disappeared off the face of the Earth, when he's arguably better than the players who have replaced him
Simonsen is arguably worse
Evans was a semi-regular scorer before Adams came in, but that has stopped

This is all subjective, of course, but one possible answer to the charge that it isn't Adams' fault given the poor squad is that on balance more players are playing worse than before under him.

At the start of the season most Blades would have named Ward, Britten and Bartley as three of our better players. Adams offloaded all of them (without a fight) within about a month of taking over. He also spent months trying to find a striker who could improve the team and finally found one (Vokes) who helped us to two good victories. He then allowed him to leave (again without a fight), apparently happy to let Henderson do his pre-season fitness training on the pitch.

He has nobody but himself to blame if he gets the boot as he's weakened the team, got terrible results and basically allowed himself to be pushed around by the money men.

 

[Ollessendro]

So marvellous Micky's fine run of form continues. What a joke.

McCabe was there last night. Any chance he'll push him out? Or any chance he'll realise what a fine mess we are I and allow a complete overhaul in the summer??

 

[Ollessendro]

Micky Adams NOT the worst manager in the history of SUFC!?

Micky's mini revival (those token wins once we were already down) has taken him off bottom spot and made him the 2nd worst manager (statistically) in the history of SUFC:

Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Adams 25 5 5 15 0.56 20%
24 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%

 

[SteelCity Blade]

Micky's mini revival (those token wins once we were already down) has taken him off bottom spot and made him the 2nd worst manager (statistically) in the history of SUFC:

Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Adams 25 5 5 15 0.56 20%
24 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%

Makes interesting reading that Olle. Quite a claim for Nigel Spackman, who I thought would have taken us up if we hadn't sold Deane and Fjortoft!

When you consider win percentage and number of games in charge though, you would have to say John Harris is our best ever manager. That is a phenomenal number of games in charge and to have a win percentage like that as well is remarkable. He certainly assembled arguably our greatest ever side.....post war I hasten to add.

 

[Selly]

Micky's mini revival (those token wins once we were already down) has taken him off bottom spot and made him the 2nd worst manager (statistically) in the history of SUFC:

Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Adams 25 5 5 15 0.56 20%
24 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%

Theres something wrong with Adams record there, 5 win and 5 draws from 235 games, do not make an average of 0.56, its 0.8.

He is only ioff the bottome in terms of Win % though. Since League placings are decided by Points I'd argue Points per Game is much more representative of the effectiveness of a manager.

Had Adams averaged 0.94 Points per game rather than 0.80, we have ended up with an extra 3.5 points, which wouldn`t be enough to save us, bit would probably have put us in with a better shout. going into the last few matches...

 

[JJ Sefton]

Makes interesting reading that Olle. Quite a claim for Nigel Spackman, who I thought would have taken us up if we hadn't sold Deane and Fjortoft!

When you consider win percentage and number of games in charge though, you would have to say John Harris is our best ever manager. That is a phenomenal number of games in charge and to have a win percentage like that as well is remarkable. He certainly assembled arguably our greatest ever side.....post war I hasten to add.

Out of interest, why does the number of games played make a win percentage any more impressive?

 

[SteelCity Blade]

Out of interest, why does the number of games played make a win percentage any more impressive?

I thought that was obvious.....because he's maintained a win percentage close to our other successful managers' over a longer period of time.

i.e. much harder to get a win percentage of say 43% over 600+ games than it is to get it over 300+ games.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Micky's mini revival (those token wins once we were already down) has taken him off bottom spot and made him the 2nd worst manager (statistically) in the history of SUFC:

Sorry Olle. I'm not sure where you've got your statistics from but by my reckoning (and Soccerbase) he only won 4 matches.
Besides, I think average points per game is a better way of judging a manager than win% and I've always sorted the table accordingly.
Below is the updated table as I see it and guess what?
However you look at it, Adams is statistically speaking the worst manager:-

Rank Manager P W D PTS AVG Win %
1 Spackman 43 20 17 77 1.79 47%
2 Kendall 82 34 27 129 1.57 41%
3 Blackwell 125 53 36 195 1.56 42%
4 Porterfield 226 98 58 352 1.56 43%
5 Warnock 388 165 100 595 1.53 43%
6 Harris 612 258 144 918 1.50 42%
7 Davison 592 248 139 883 1.49 42%
8 Mercer 154 64 35 227 1.47 42%
9 Bruce 55 22 15 81 1.47 40%
10 Freeman 132 54 30 192 1.45 41%
11 Nicholson 1216 486 281 1739 1.43 40%
12 Robson 38 14 12 54 1.42 37%
13 Bassett 393 150 101 551 1.40 38%
14 Coldwell 23 9 5 32 1.39 39%
15 Rowley 43 16 11 59 1.37 37%
16 Furphy 80 27 22 103 1.29 34%
17 Thompson 17 5 6 21 1.24 29%
18 Mcewan 86 27 25 106 1.23 31%
20 Haslam 158 50 40 190 1.20 32%
21 Speed 18 6 3 21 1.17 33%
21 Heath 23 7 5 26 1.13 30%
22 Sirrell 81 20 23 83 1.02 25%
23 Peters 16 3 6 15 0.94 19%
24 Adams 24 4 5 17 0.71 17%

 

[Selly]

Out of interest, why does the number of games played make a win percentage any more impressive?

I'd guess its because it makes it less likely that it was a random blip (as can be argued Spackmans reign was).

Ask any statitician whether a larger sample size makes for more accurate statistics.

 

[Darren]

Makes interesting reading that Olle. Quite a claim for Nigel Spackman, who I thought would have taken us up if we hadn't sold Deane and Fjortoft!

When you consider win percentage and number of games in charge though, you would have to say John Harris is our best ever manager. That is a phenomenal number of games in charge and to have a win percentage like that as well is remarkable. He certainly assembled arguably our greatest ever side.....post war I hasten to add.

What also has to be borne in mind is that, of the top 4, none ever managed United in the first tier and the 5th (Warnock) only in one season out of 8. Compare that to Harris (9.5 top flight seasons out of just over 13.5).

Incidentally, apart from Nicholson (not really a manager), Furphy is the only manager to have managed solely in the first tier.

---------- Post added at 01:52 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:50 PM ----------

Out of interest, why does the number of games played make a win percentage any more impressive?

Look at it this way, if you don't take into account number of games played, Danny Bergara (caretaker in Jan 88 - 2 games played - 2 wins and 100% record) is the best manager in United's history ever.

 

[BladeHearts]

I think its also a flawed table when it suggests Bryan Robson was a better manager for us than Dave Bassett!!!!

 

[Darren]

I think its also a flawed table when it suggests Bryan Robson was a better manager for us than Dave Bassett!!!!

Again it's down to Bassett having half of his approximate 8 seasons in the top flight. Someone needs to do a table of records for top flight seasons only!

 

[Selly]

I think its also a flawed table when it suggests Bryan Robson was a better manager for us than Dave Bassett!!!!

As with all stats you need the context behind them.

Bassett spent 4 seasons in the top tier, 2 in the second and one in the third
Robson spent 2/3rds of a season in the second tier, with possibly (89/90 and 05/06 were possibly better) the best squad we ever had at that level.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

I think its also a flawed table when it suggests Bryan Robson was a better manager for us than Dave Bassett!!!!

I think it's a fair way and interesting way of comparing certain managers records.
Spackman, Kendall, Blackwell, Bruce, Robson, Thompson, Speed, Heath and Adams all spent their entire Blades career in the second tier.
All Blades fans know that Bassett and Harris spent most seasons in the top flight and would therefore take that into account.
We would also automatically make allowances for the differing resources available to say Bassett and Robson.
I think Speed v Adams v Heath v Warnock is a fair comparison overall.

 

[Darren]

A quick managerial trivia question:

Counting all the managers since Harris first got the job in 1959 what achievement do Spackman and Robson share as United managers which no other manager since 1959 has acheived.

Answer at 3 if no one gets it.

PS: caretakers not included!

 

[Grecian2000]

Never lost an FA Cup tie?

 

[JJ Sefton]

A quick managerial trivia question:

Counting all the managers since Harris first got the job in 1959 what achievement do Spackman and Robson share as United managers which no other manager since 1959 has acheived.

Answer at 3 if no one gets it.

PS: caretakers not included!

Havent done a full season?

 

[Revolution]

The other thing wrong with the chart is it lumps cup games in with league games.

 

[Darren]

Never lost an FA Cup tie?

I think thats right - they both have unbeaten records in the FA Cup and no other manager who played an FA CUP game (Peters, Heath and Speed didn't) can boast that.

However, I was thinking of something else

---------- Post added at 02:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:33 PM ----------

Havent done a full season?

Neither did Heath, Peters or Adams!

 

[Selly]

A quick managerial trivia question:

Counting all the managers since Harris first got the job in 1959 what achievement do Spackman and Robson share as United managers which no other manager since 1959 has acheived.

Answer at 3 if no one gets it.

PS: caretakers not included!

Managed us after having scored against us during their playing career??

Which if true would make Steve Bruce about 1 foot away from being the third...

 

[SteelCity Blade]

Never lost an FA Cup tie?

That was what I thought of as well. United were still in the FA Cup (going on to a quarter final tie against Coventry) when Spackman left and we were set for a 5th round tie (I think) with Middlesbrough when Robson left. Looking at our other managers that answer is correct as well!

---------- Post added at 02:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:38 PM ----------

Managed us after having scored against us during their playing career??

Which if true would make Steve Bruce about 1 foot away from being the third...

Wont be that. Speed scored against us for Leeds once.