Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I'm quoting the figure MR gave.
It's 18 months.......
I'm quoting the figure MR gave.
For teams like Chelsea, yes, but not for CCFC, it's a case of, 'oh shit, we might get relegated with this manager!' Only SISU manager unlucky to get the sack was Hoofroyd, although I still welcome his sacking.
CJ is right Warwick Uni back him
Conclusions
In the short-term on average clubs seem to gain some kind of “honeymoon effect” from changing football manager although, as seen in the case of Chelsea, too many changes seem even to reduce the impact of the honeymoon period. Chelsea also seem to have gained relatively little benefit from changing manager, perhaps because of the high level at which the club was performing even during its blips. This would confirm that success for a football manager is a relative concept which is judged against the availability of resources and the level at which a manager is expected to achieve. Even the “trapdoor” for Chelsea managers is at a level of performance which might be deemed excellent for many managers in many clubs. It takes little to trigger the trapdoor, perhaps explaining the churn of 12 managers since the formation of the Premier League; the last five of these having an average tenure of 0.86 years. The performance gain from these changes in steady state, once the honeymoon period is over, is 0.11 average points gain per match, so only one extra point in nine matches from a base which is already high.
It should also be noted that the extent of any gain appears to be declining over time. Three of the last four Chelsea managers have done worse during their honeymoon period than did the previous incumbent.
There are a number of plausible explanations for why this might be the case.
Firstly, all of the managers, both outgoing and incoming have achieved success and might be broadly comparable. Secondly, it may be, in line with contextual views of leadership that the choice of individual leader has little impact on organisational performance. Lieberson and O’Connor 1972) suggest organizational performance is more influenced by other aspects of the organisational context such as resources. So perhaps performance might be affected by the quality of players, injuries or just bad luck and the failure to capitalise on the honeymoon period by new managers in recent times may be explained by the relative reduction in resource availability compared with earlier years.
The final explanation is that switching to a different leader brings with it disruption which, in itself, can have a negative effect on performance (Grusky 1960, 1963, 1964). Hope (2003) suggests that there are different phases in a football manager’s lifespan – some in which he may have a run of bad luck or a blip and others where performance may take a downturn whilst the manager is rebuilding for the longer term. It may well be that this disruption is cumulative and so while a change may bring benefits, repeated change eventually destabilises a club are results in lower performance as players and others within the club may not be able to keep up with or accept the need to keep adjusting to the style and approach of new managers.
This research is not suggesting that a club should never change football manager.
As in other organisations, sustained decline in performance is often addressed by changing manager – and this may arrest and turnaround performance. The data would suggest, however, that clubs may pull the trigger during a minor blip in performance rather than a sustained decline. Moreover, the level at which they do this, and the benefits gained from the switch may be less significant than they anticipate.
I'm quoting the figure MR gave.
And Tim does
Grendel and SBT you know that Tim knows his stuff and is a straight honest talker so CJ you are right, I would guess that pretty much wraps that one up.
Rebate anyone? ( sorry I forgot such a thing doesn't exist)
"The one thing we have lacked over a number of years is a little bit of stability.
“We’re going to review what has happened this season when there have been a number of mistakes on and off the pitch and we all know what they are. We’re going to learn from those and, following the post-mortem, we’re going to restructure.
The Sky Blues have worked their way through ten managers since they slipped out of the top flight 11 years ago but Fisher stressed: “This is where we need to draw a line in the sand and say enough – enough of firing managers. We need to get out of that habit and, to draw a football analogy, put our foot on the ball, give Andy a chance to reorganise the resources.
“Andy is front and centre stage at the moment and we are going to work with him to make sure that he’s got all the resources lined up.
Read More http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ue-one-budget-92746-30828907/2/#ixzz2LIStOyFu
Robins said 11 months and was referring to the average length a manager of Coventry lasts.
CJ may only really love Coleman as he bought the Clueless One with him.
Ranson brought Coleman who brought Thorn who brought McDonald, Malaga, and Kilbane. Couldn't make it up.
Who else did they buy?
Robins said 11 months and was referring to the average length a manager of Coventry lasts.
And Tim does
Grendel and SBT you know that Tim knows his stuff and is a straight honest talker so CJ you are right, I would guess that pretty much wraps that one up.
Rebate anyone? ( sorry I forgot such a thing doesn't exist)
"The one thing we have lacked over a number of years is a little bit of stability.
“We’re going to review what has happened this season when there have been a number of mistakes on and off the pitch and we all know what they are. We’re going to learn from those and, following the post-mortem, we’re going to restructure.
The Sky Blues have worked their way through ten managers since they slipped out of the top flight 11 years ago but Fisher stressed: “This is where we need to draw a line in the sand and say enough – enough of firing managers. We need to get out of that habit and, to draw a football analogy, put our foot on the ball, give Andy a chance to reorganise the resources.
“Andy is front and centre stage at the moment and we are going to work with him to make sure that he’s got all the resources lined up.
Read More http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/co...ue-one-budget-92746-30828907/2/#ixzz2LIStOyFu
That rebate sounds 'fishy' to me, why should we pay 400k and get 100k back, why not just 300k with no rebates, my scepticism could be misplaced, but I just don't see the point, there's got to be a catch.
Eastwood, Hussey, McIndoe, Wood, Clingan -- the list of talent is endless.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?