Sacking a manager is more harmful in the short term...

[Alexikokopops]

Based on 40 years of Football League and Premier League data

I've just read this and thought it was something else to throw into the mix...

DISCUSS

[breadandcheese]

For me there's nothing to discuss. It's too late to change manager, nor do I want to change. I think Pearson is a good manager. Yes, our form has dropped off a cliff, and I am worried that we won't make the play-offs, but at this stage of the season, it would do more harm than good.

We have a tough run-in, of that there's no doubt, but they're teams around us, so it's in our hands. We surely can't play as badly as we did against Derby in our next few games.

[bovril]

I think it's not how often you change managers but how and with whom. Swansea are a good example of a club with a footballing philosophy who have tried to appoint managers that fit the overall picture. We went from Pearson to Sousa to Erikson back to Pearson, it's a mess and it will take some time to sort out.

[Mike the Metal Ed]

I think it's not how often you change managers but how and with whom. Swansea are a good example of a club with a footballing philosophy who have tried to appoint managers that fit the overall picture. We went from Pearson to Sousa to Erikson back to Pearson, it's a mess and it will take some time to sort out.

Swansea didn't have much say, their last three managers have all been headhunted by other clubs. No doubt their selection process has been top notch though.

[bovril]

Swansea didn't have much say, their last three managers have all been headhunted by other clubs. No doubt their selection process has been top notch though.

Sure, but it shows that even with a reasonably regular change of manager there can be continuity. Just firing and hiring with no long term plan (as we've done the last 10 years) doesn't work.

[Jace]

I'm sure Sir Alex Fergusons success at Man Utd over the last 25 years would of had a decent impact on these statistics

[Guest shearfox]

Pearson is doing a good job, we have been no where for over a decade, the only time we have been in the play-offs is with Pearson.

We are going through a tough spell for sure but hey it is better than being well off the playoffs like previous seasons.

Pearson hasn't been here for a full proper season yet and it would be a mistake to get rid.

[Alexikokopops]

I'm sure Sir Alex Fergusons success at Man Utd over the last 25 years would of had a decent impact on these statistics

I doubt it given that they created control groups from clubs with a similar run of form - I doubt that Man Utd have often had a similar run of form to those teams that tend to sack their manager, except in the early days. Also, it's looking at short term performance, so even if Man Utd was used as a control group from early day performance there wouldn't be comparisons to the current day Man Utd. Finally, there's been hundreds of managerial sackings you'd hope that the odd outlier like Ferguson wouldn't skew the figures. I'm not saying the study is perfect but if it's not it's not because of Ferguson.

[ealingfox]

I'm sure Sir Alex Fergusons success at Man Utd over the last 25 years would of had a decent impact on these statistics

Maybe balanced out by Chelsea's continued success despite constant hiring and firing?

[BlueBlue]

Maybe balanced out by Chelsea's continued success despite constant hiring and firing?

And enormous amounts of cash, by comparison to most other clubs!

[Kitchandro]

I do agree with the sentiment, and it's what I've been trying to say to people who are bringing up Billy Davies after every match.

On the other hand, the article seems to be focusing on the teams who are in relegation scraps. If you just took the teams chasing the play-offs or champions league, would the results have been different? There's only a point difference on average so it's concievable.

The reason? Football is more random than we think. Dismissals usually follow a poor run of results but those defeats are often down to random bad luck, injuries, a tough run of fixtures and such like, all of which eventually revert to the mean. When they do, those frustrating defeats and draws suddenly become wins.

Sadly, I'm not sure we have any of those excuses, which is why it's so demoralising.

But as I say, I agree with the general point, no doubt it's a risk to replace the manager, especially at this late stage. The only thing is, will the board see it as a bigger risk to keep him? If we drop out of the play-offs, maybe...

[Mike the Metal Ed]

I do agree with the sentiment, and it's what I've been trying to say to people who are bringing up Billy Davies after every match.

On the other hand, the article seems to be focusing on the teams who are in relegation scraps. If you just took the teams chasing the play-offs or champions league, would the results have been different? There's only a point difference on average so it's concievable.

Sadly, I'm not sure we have any of those excuses, which is why it's so demoralising.

But as I say, I agree with the general point, no doubt it's a risk to replace the manager, especially at this late stage. The only thing is, will the board see it as a bigger risk to keep him? If we drop out of the play-offs, maybe...

At the tail end of the season, a run against the lower teams in the league could be considered tricky as the bottom 12 in the league scrap to avoid the drop. The interesting thing now is that we've got all our promotion rivals to play, and that, so often, has played right into our hands.

[Harry - LCFC]

I'd rather Pearson was sacked now than at the end of the season (not that I want him sacked at all by the way).

The problems we face are short term ones not long term. We're just suffering from poor form, there's nothing wrong with the players we have at the squad. Bringing in a new manager would likely mean a number of changes to the club's future plans. If we don't go up next year we stand a far better chance if we stay on the patch Pearson is leading us on.

[Leicesterpool]

Look at Sheffield Wednesday doing okay under Megson then suddenly bang his gone! and they replace him with Jones and they play even better and eventually get promoted, the same with Huddersfield last season under Lee Clark when they sacked him and brought Grayson in.

[Alexikokopops]

Look at Sheffield Wednesday doing okay under Megson then suddenly bang his gone! and they replace him with Jones and they play even better and eventually get promoted, the same with Huddersfield last season under Lee Clark when they sacked him and brought Grayson in.

And the prize for missing the point of the study goes to...

[jamesmilner]

if we drop out the top 6 he should be gone , we have something for the new manager to aim for , until then pearson stays imo . data is data and stats are stats , dont mean a thing as every club/team are different .

[MooseBreath]

if you are going to wield the axe, do it when a new manager still has a chance, and the funds, to turn things around, as with QPR. Or, alternatively, do it when all hopes for the season are extinguished and the new man can rebuild for the following campaign.

Covering all bases a bit there aren't they

[MC Prussian]

Look at Sheffield Wednesday doing okay under Megson then suddenly bang his gone! and they replace him with Jones and they play even better and eventually get promoted, the same with Huddersfield last season under Lee Clark when they sacked him and brought Grayson in.

... and Huddersfield's motor stalled after a while again, so Grayson got sacked himself. If your comment proves anything, it is that owners and clubs are way less patient in sticking with one manager nowadays.

This policy has hurt more people and careers than it actually aided them.

[I blame Wellens]

Brother reads the Guardian. He over complicates everything, reads to many books, champagne socialist and has not got a clue about football. Nuff said.

[Phil Bertstreet]

Time to go. With our run-in it's already too late. Bye bye NP.

[ozleicester]

" ...the average tenure of those dismissed fell from 3.12 years in 1992-93 to 1.36 in 2009-10"

What a remarkable stat that is.

[Alexikokopops]

... and Huddersfield's motor stalled after a while again, so Grayson got sacked himself. If your comment proves anything, it is that owners and clubs are way less patient in sticking with one manager nowadays.

This policy has hurt more people and careers than it actually aided them.

Plus the whole point of the study is that you don't know what would have happened if Huddersfield (for example) hadn't sacked Lee Clark - would they have done as well as Grayson? Which is why the study attempts to create control groups (I'm still not sure how viable a control group they are, but it's an interesting attempt). Leicesterpool completely missed that point with his post.

Brother reads the Guardian. He over complicates everything, reads to many books, champagne socialist and has not got a clue about football. Nuff said.

With a sample size of one all I can say is I'm glad John Goddard and Stephen Dobson were doing the study and not you