Sly Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Season Games Won Lost Drawn Win/% Loss/% Draw/% 05/06 13 4 4 5 30.77% 30.77% 38.46% 04/05 52 15 15 22 28.85% 28.85% 42.31% 03/04 43 7 19 17 16.28% 44.19% 39.53% 02/03 51 29 8 14 56.86% 15.69% 27.45% 01/02 42 7 22 13 16.67% 52.38% 30.95% M Adams 111 41 31 39 36.94% 27.93% 35.14% C Levein 47 15 14 18 31.91% 29.79% 38.30%
The People's Hero Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Can you do the same thing with the final column reading 'draw %'?
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 M Adams 111 41 25 39 36.94% - Half of which were in the Premiership! C Levein 47 15 14 18 31.91% Says it all I think.
Ric Flair Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 M Adams 111 41 25 39 36.94% - Half of which were in the Premiership! C Levein 47 15 14 18 31.91% Says it all I think. Why does it? Everyone is well aware of what Adams did in the promotion season but it all went down hill from then on and had to go, he said so himself. I'm surprised Levein's win ratio is that high I though it would be in the 20's!!!!
The People's Hero Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Why does it? Everyone is well aware of what Adams did in the promotion season but it all went down hill from then on and had to go, he said so himself. I'm surprised Levein's win ratio is that high I though it would be in the 20's!!!! Give it a few more games and it will be.
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Why does it? Everyone is well aware of what Adams did in the promotion season but it all went down hill from then on and had to go, he said so himself. I'm surprised Levein's win ratio is that high I though it would be in the 20's!!!! I simply don't believe that he lost all of his managerial ability in the space of 10 games! I'm sure you go through 'bad'* spells at work. The fact remains that results were improving, not collapsing as of now. * we were just a couple of points off the playoffs.
Ric Flair Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 I simply don't believe that he lost all of his managerial ability in the space of 10 games! I'm sure you go through 'bad'* spells at work. The fact remains that results were improving, not collapsing as of now. * we were just a couple of points off the playoffs. To be honest FNQ I have often thought back to last season and thought the same. But there was more to it than that and time has healed how bad it was. It wasn't just the 10 games, even our fans wouldn't do that to a manager. Nobody has ever said that's the reason why Adams had to go, it was everything else we had to put up with. The horrible football, the old journeymen, the refusal to play youngsters, playing players out of position, poor discipline. Not to mention the major stuff that happened whilst he was in charge (La Manga) where it just seem inevitable that he was a dead man walking and he lost his sparkle. I'd even say Adams couldn't be arsed a few games in to last season, he knew he needed out and the fans were in agreement.
The People's Hero Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 He actually resigned a couple of times I think and the board refused to accept it. That was earlyish last season. By that point his heart wasn't in it and he'd lost the support of the dressing room and a large section of the support. Inevitable he wouldn't last long after that regardless of managerial ability.
Sly Posted 29 September 2005 Author Posted 29 September 2005 I'd like to add Bassett, Taylor and O'Neill as well.....but don't have the info.
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 He actually resigned a couple of times I think and the board refused to accept it. That was earlyish last season. By that point his heart wasn't in it and he'd lost the support of the dressing room and a large section of the support. I think thats slightly unfair. He offered to resign over La Manga because he felt he had a responsibility to do so, not because his heart wasn't in it. To me, he always seemed 100% commited to LCFC and genuinely wanted the best for the football club and not Micky Adams. http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/le...rticle63378.ece
The People's Hero Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 I think thats slightly unfair. He offered to resign over La Manga because he felt he had a responsibility to do so, not because his heart wasn't in it. To me, he always seemed 100% commited to LCFC and genuinely wanted the best for the football club and not Micky Adams. http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/le...rticle63378.ece That actually sounds like the way MA used to talk. 'Micky Adams wants what is best for this football club, not what is best for Micky Adams.' Errr... cheers Micky.
Guest Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 M Adams 111 41 25 39 36.94% - Half of which were in the Premiership! C Levein 47 15 14 18 31.91% Says it all I think. If we won the same number of games in the Premiership as we did in the Championship, why were we promoted from one, and relegated from the other?
Ric Flair Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 I think thats slightly unfair. He offered to resign over La Manga because he felt he had a responsibility to do so, not because his heart wasn't in it. To me, he always seemed 100% commited to LCFC and genuinely wanted the best for the football club and not Micky Adams. http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/le...rticle63378.ece He actually offered his resignation after we got beat by PNE in the League Cup and after the Brighton game aswell I think. Can anyone else confirm this or have I made it up? I swear after he finally left, it was said he'd tried to resign twice already that season.
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 If we won the same number of games in the Premiership as we did in the Championship, why were we promoted from one, and relegated from the other? What are you talking about?? We got relegated because we didn't have a good enough team. It shows how good he is at winning championship matches. Levein has only managed in the championship and has a lower win percentage than Micky Adams who managed half of his games against some of the worlds best teams in the Premiership.
Sly Posted 29 September 2005 Author Posted 29 September 2005 Can you do the same thing with the final column reading 'draw %'? Your wish is my command!!
Guest Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 What are you talking about?? We got relegated because we didn't have a good enough team. It shows how good he is at winning championship matches. Levein has only managed in the championship and has a lower win percentage than Micky Adams who managed half of his games against some of the worlds best teams in the Premiership. M Adams 111 41 25 39 36.94% - Half of which were in the Premiership! Your statement suggests that half of the 36.94% of wins were in the Premiership. If we'd won the same number of games in the Premiership as we did in Division 1 as it was then, we would not have been relegated. If this was not what you meant, perhaps you should make your points a little clearer in future. As for not having a good enough team, surely it was Adams responsibility to ensure that the squad we had was good enough? As for being good enough for the Championship, I'm glad to see your ambitions mirror your hero's. It's funny you've suddenly reappeared now. Is the Ricoh not good enough for you?
The People's Hero Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 He actually offered his resignation after we got beat by PNE in the League Cup and after the Brighton game aswell I think. Can anyone else confirm this or have I made it up? I swear after he finally left, it was said he'd tried to resign twice already that season. This is what I was referring to. Not certain that the latter occasion was the Brighton game, but he certainly offered his resignation (which was turned down) on a number of occasions last season.
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 As for not having a good enough team, surely it was Adams responsibility to ensure that the squad we had was good enough? It's funny you've suddenly reappeared now. Is the Ricoh not good enough for you? You've got to be joking. We had no chance of surviving in the prem with our resources. It was a miracle that Micky got us anywhere near survival. I've not reappeared. What are you talking about??
Guest Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 You've got to be joking. We had no chance of surviving in the prem with our resources. It was a miracle that Micky got us anywhere near survival. I've not reappeared. What are you talking about?? Rather than padding the squad out with mercenary journeymen, and falling out with the better players, he could have been a bit more savvy. Considering our resources, he managed to change almost the entire squad not just once but twice that season. So don't give me that 'poor Micky' crap.
FNQ Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Rather than padding the squad out with mercenary journeymen, and falling out with the better players, he could have been a bit more savvy. Considering our resources, he managed to change almost the entire squad not just once but twice that season. So don't give me that 'poor Micky' crap. With our resources it was either journeymen or young unproven players from the lower leagues/scotland. Do you seriously think we would have survived if we went that way?
Ric Flair Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 With our resources it was either journeymen or young unproven players from the lower leagues/scotland. Do you seriously think we would have survived if we went that way? Adams went for quantity instead of quality and although it nearly paid off it was another short term fix that this club has had their fingers burnt with.
Guest Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Adams went for quantity instead of quality and although it nearly paid off it was another short term fix that this club has had their fingers burnt with. Exactly. Whilst too many youngsters is a problem, I'd rather take the risk with some hungry young players than pay extortionate money for players due to retire who don't give a flying FCUK. They don't come cheap you know, think of what Adams could have done with the money he'd have saved on wages.
Ric Flair Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Exactly. Whilst too many youngsters is a problem, I'd rather take the risk with some hungry young players than pay extortionate money for players due to retire who don't give a flying FCUK. They don't come cheap you know, think of what Adams could have done with the money he'd have saved on wages. I know!! We had a decent budget the season we went up and could quite easily of paid a few lower league teams a transfer fee for their prized assets but we got Steve Howey, Craig Hignett, John Curtis, Keith Gillespie and many many more whipper snappers.
step Posted 29 September 2005 Posted 29 September 2005 Incase any one aint heard the story When sven was caught rogering the FA's secretery. He was going to get the sack, The Everton manager was going to take over England MA was going to take over Everton When it all fell through that is when MA lost interest in city.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.