MON? Adams? Bloomfield? Wallace?

[pleatout]

This must have been mentioned before but it really surpised me.

 

Who are our top 2 most successful managers are based on percentage wins? [i'm ignoring those with less than 10 games as manager].

 

Before you have a look, have a guess. 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Leicester_City_F.C._managers

 

 

I assume it is fairly accurate even though it is wikipedia.

[MONreborn]

Before people used the excuse that Pearson's record doesn't count because half of it was in League 1. In his second spell we have almost played as many games now and his record is virtually identical without league 1. What a great manager he has been for us already, and hopefully, will continue to be for years to come.

[Fox92]

So apprently Nige is one game off of 107 again. His record is virtually the same, and to have only lost a combined 42 games is an immense record. I know that's taking into consideration League One, but it still counts obviously, as you can only beat what's in front of you.

[The Horse's Mouth]

He's practically first and second. 

[pleatout]

He's practically first and second. 

That's my point. He is 1st and 2nd. Although the 2nd spell figures add up to 96 games not 106.

[Mark_w]

I mentioned this weeks ago and no one seemed to care.

[smudger63]

Well if those stats are to be believed, Svens average was 43%, not that far behind Pearsons, but obviously that can`t be right, as most on here are always quick to point out, that he was a crap manager, and left a useless team when he left! 

[Deucalion]

He's not far off managing for the same amount of games as O'Neill, who it says was here for 222 games.

 

The Pearson eras don't seem as long as the O'Neill era.

 

Also, he is our 6th longest serving manager since 1919.

[Kitchandro]

Win averages mean jack shit.

 

Taylor's is higher than Bloomfield's

[Jay]

Also note that come the end of the season in terms of games he will be 4th in the list of most games as a manager which is some going and probably deserves a lot more credit

[The Doctor]

Win averages mean jack shit.

 

Taylor's is higher than Bloomfield's

 

This might be because I've got Lamby on ignore nowadays, but that's the stupidest thing I've read on here in a long time.

 

Win averages are a very good indicator of the job a manager is doing, because it shows how much we're winning under them.

[davieG]

Not forgetting Matt Gillies of course 

[Leicesterpool]

One thing to mention though is,  the league one campaign was the first and only time we've spent at that level and of course Nigel was the only manager to manage us at that level. Nigel is one of the best manager's we've had this club but he's still a long way from being a legend. Can't believe some people are comparing Nigel to Martin and Jock! Micky Adams for me is unsung hero, he took us up to the premier league when we're just been in administration, plus look at the team we had back then! 

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

Those stats are meaningless, not to say laughable. Look at the achievements, to get the real picture.

 

Not knocking Pearson, because he is going very well this season, and hopefully he will achieve getting us promoted.

[pleatout]

Of course there are lies, damned lies and statistics.

 

I appreciate what people are saying about the div 1 season, presumably the inference is that we had a championship quality side in div 1.  Which also applies to anyone managing us when we've been relegated from the prem/old 1st div.

 

Personally I hold Brian Little's record in high regard.  10 years of nothingness and mediocrity to build on! To play offs & to promotion.  MoN, obviously and Mickey Adams - I agree an unsung hero.

 

All that being what it is, it is still a surpise and a hell of an achievement to have 2 spells and BOTH be as good and probably better than anyone else.

[The Doctor]

One thing to mention though is,  the league one campaign was the first and only time we've spent at that level and of course Nigel was the only manager to manage us at that level. Nigel is one of the best manager's we've had this club but he's still a long way from being a legend. Can't believe some people are comparing Nigel to Martin and Jock! Micky Adams for me is unsung hero, he took us up to the premier league when we're just been in administration, plus look at the team we had back then! 

 

Yeah, I mean Ian Walker (international keeper), Matt Elliot (played at the 98 world cup), Muzzy (Played in the 2002 world cup), Dickov, Deane, Taggart (over 50 caps for NI), McKinlay (international player)... not a promotion winning squad there for him. 

 

He didn't sign anyone bar McKinley or Summerbee either given the embargo - just brought through Tommy Wright (now at Tamworth). Credit to him for getting us straight back up through the administration and Wise fiascos but he did inherit an already strong squad.

[davieG]

Based on achievements, level played at and length of time at that level the best managers in my time are Gillies and MON.

[Kitchandro]

This might be because I've got Lamby on ignore nowadays, but that's the stupidest thing I've read on here in a long time.

 

Win averages are a very good indicator of the job a manager is doing, because it shows how much we're winning under them.

 

Obviously not, see Peter Taylor and Jimmy Bloomfield.

 

Win averages don't take into account draws, standard of opposition, which league you're in, expectations, or that Peter Taylor was an absolute berk.

[Leicester_Numan]

I mentioned this weeks ago and no one seemed to care.

He was first and third last season and we were mentioning it then, they didn't matter to all those wanting him gone, so they won't matter now. His stats took a bit of a hammering from February onwards but they were still good, now they're back to where they were.

[Fox92]

Yeah, I mean Ian Walker (international keeper), Matt Elliot (played at the 98 world cup), Muzzy (Played in the 2002 world cup), Dickov, Deane, Taggart (over 50 caps for NI), McKinlay (international player)... not a promotion winning squad there for him.

He didn't sign anyone bar McKinley or Summerbee either given the embargo - just brought through Tommy Wright (now at Tamworth). Credit to him for getting us straight back up through the administration and Wise fiascos but he did inherit an already strong squad.

Adams did a great job here given everything that was happening... He did also once say that without Izzet we were 'average'.

The squad was strong, but he's still got to achieve. And he achieved well, winning automatic promotion. I mean, Sousa took over a strong squad that missed out on the play offs previous, but didn't achieve anything.

I'd also say that 02/03 was a strong division. Portsmouth, Ipswich, Sheffield United, Wolves, Nottingham Forest, Derby among others, were all strong sides that had the ability to strengthen.

I'll always respect Micky Adams for his job here.

[Lionheart]

Started watching LCFC under Bloomfield and I can honestly say that Peter Taylor is the biggest c**t we've had in charge.

[inckley fox]

This might be because I've got Lamby on ignore nowadays, but that's the stupidest thing I've read on here in a long time.

 

Win averages are a very good indicator of the job a manager is doing, because it shows how much we're winning under them.

It's a bit like judging a match on the number of corners won by each side, rather than the number of goals scored.

 

O'Neill's win average is average even though he won two League Cups, went to another final, secured four top half top flight finishes on the bounce and won promotion. On the other hand Pearson's second stay has, as yet, failed to deliver on its stated aims; Sven spent many times more money than everyone else combined since Taylor, nearly exhausting our injection of transfer funds on a side that was nowhere near good enough to achieve its only objective. Adams left us in the division he found us, albeit with a deeply unsettled squad with an average age of over 30.

 

So yes, it's an interesting statistic. But it doesn't come close to depicting how well a manager has done in his job.

 

Wasn't there a game in the 60s when we won 30 corners but got hammered 3-0 by Manchester United? I know which manager went away thinking he'd done a job that day.

[inckley fox]

Adams did a great job here given everything that was happening... He did also once say that without Izzet we were 'average'.

The squad was strong, but he's still got to achieve. And he achieved well, winning automatic promotion. I mean, Sousa took over a strong squad that missed out on the play offs previous, but didn't achieve anything.

I'd also say that 02/03 was a strong division. Portsmouth, Ipswich, Sheffield United, Wolves, Nottingham Forest, Derby among others, were all strong sides that had the ability to strengthen.

I'll always respect Micky Adams for his job here.

 

He was, by his own admission, a lousy Assistant Manager for the side that slumped to relegation in 02. He then inherited a strong squad which was, rightly in my opinion, allowed to stay together by going into administration. He did a great job of keeping results on track during that time, but then - partly as a result of finances, partly as a result of his career-long penchant for large influxes of bargain veterans - introduced a revolving-door transfer policy that would see us relegated and left with an ancient squad. Our failure to properly reassemble it (something we can't, I concede, blame him for) over the coming seasons ended in relegation four years later.

 

Perhaps that one year in the Premier League kept us afloat for a few years to come, so for that reason and that reason alone we can say that his effect on the club was a positive one. In terms of playing personnel, or league position, it's hard to be so admiring.

[The Doctor]

Adams did a great job here given everything that was happening... He did also once say that without Izzet we were 'average'.

The squad was strong, but he's still got to achieve. And he achieved well, winning automatic promotion. I mean, Sousa took over a strong squad that missed out on the play offs previous, but didn't achieve anything.

I'd also say that 02/03 was a strong division. Portsmouth, Ipswich, Sheffield United, Wolves, Nottingham Forest, Derby among others, were all strong sides that had the ability to strengthen.

I'll always respect Micky Adams for his job here.

 

Aye, he did a good job - but saying "look at the squad we had then" as if it made his job harder rather than easier is ridiculous - it was a strong division and he did a good job, but likewise he had a good squad to work with.

 

It's a bit like judging a match on the number of corners won by each side, rather than the number of goals scored.

 

O'Neill's win average is average even though he won two League Cups, went to another final, secured four top half top flight finishes on the bounce and won promotion. On the other hand Pearson's second stay has, as yet, failed to deliver on its stated aims; Sven spent many times more money than everyone else combined since Taylor, nearly exhausting our injection of transfer funds on a side that was nowhere near good enough to achieve its only objective. Adams left us in the division he found us, albeit with a deeply unsettled squad with an average age of over 30.

 

So yes, it's an interesting statistic. But it doesn't come close to depicting how well a manager has done in his job.

 

Wasn't there a game in the 60s when we won 30 corners but got hammered 3-0 by Manchester United? I know which manager went away thinking he'd done a job that day.

 

Well not really, because corners doesn't reflect goals, but wins reflects points picked up - a win percentage of 20% would give a win every 5 games, so at least 3 points from every 15, there's no connections between corners won and goals scored, there is between games won and points obtained.

 

Obviously not, see Peter Taylor and Jimmy Bloomfield.

 

Win averages don't take into account draws, standard of opposition, which league you're in, expectations, or that Peter Taylor was an absolute berk.

 

Well obviously they aren't the be-all and end all, but they are very good for judging the standard of a manager, higher win percentage = more wins per x number of games = taking more points per x games...

[whoareyaaa]

For me it has to be MON I had a season ticket throughout his time and he achieved a hell of a lot, won plenty of throhys and established us in the Prem and yearly visit to Wembley he has to be up there as No.1, then Adams but if the owners stick with Pearson then I think he will suppress both of them.

 

It will take some beating MON but I think Pearson is the right man to do it.