The dedicated Chris Wilder thread

[NathStPaul]

Chief Ince sympathiser Yorkshire Royal strikes again.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Despite saying his decisions towards the end of his tenure didn't help... yeah clearly sympathetic.

Either way, the point was he was part of the collective. Not solely to blame, but not blameless either.

[Sutekh]

Also posted in the R&G section, Reading manager's records since Mark McGhee arrived in May 1991 (in order of win ratio):

Pos Name - Win Ratio % - Loss Ratio %

1. Alan Pardew - 48.3 - 27.4
2. Brian McDermott (1) - 45.0 - 29.6
3. Steve Coppell - 44.3 - 31.6
4. Mark McGhee - 43.2 - 29.0
5. Jaap Stam - 40.8 - 35.7
6. Mark Bowen - 37.2 - 34.8
7. Nigel Adkins - 36.3 - 38.8
8. Quinn/Gooding - 35.8 - 36.6
9. Steve Clarke - 35.8 - 37.7
10. Veljko Paunovic - 34.9 - 43.3
11. Terry Bullivant - 32.0 - 40.0
12. Paul Ince - 31.0 - 50.0
13. Brian McDermott (2) - 30.0 - 43.3
14. Tommy Burns - 29.4 - 44.1
15. Brendan Rodgers - 26.1 - 47.8
16. Jose Gomes - 23.6 - 39.5
17. Paul Clement - 23.3 - 50.0

Congratulations to Mr Ince and Mr Clement in reaching the magic 50% ratio.

Conclusion - don't appoint managers with the first name of Paul.

[One8Seven1*]

Despite saying his decisions towards the end of his tenure didn't help... yeah clearly sympathetic.

Either way, the point was he was part of the collective. Not solely to blame, but not blameless either.

We didn't win in how many games? After the start we had, there's little excuse for that. He lost the dressing room and paid the ultimate price. He's one of those managers who gets a bounce at the beginning but is useless long-term.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Despite saying his decisions towards the end of his tenure didn't help... yeah clearly sympathetic.

Either way, the point was he was part of the collective. Not solely to blame, but not blameless either.

We didn't win in how many games? After the start we had, there's little excuse for that. He lost the dressing room and paid the ultimate price. He's one of those managers who gets a bounce at the beginning but is useless long-term.

Yep exactly. Still not sure how/why it went wrong or what he tried to do differently (whether he did at all), but not many excuses can be made. The injury situation was building up, but we'd suffered through that for a lot of the campaign already. Obviously the off the field issues don't help, but he was proving he could do it at the start of the campaign, so it shouldn't have dropped like it did.

[URZZZZ]

Despite saying his decisions towards the end of his tenure didn't help... yeah clearly sympathetic.

Either way, the point was he was part of the collective. Not solely to blame, but not blameless either.

We didn't win in how many games? After the start we had, there's little excuse for that. He lost the dressing room and paid the ultimate price. He's one of those managers who gets a bounce at the beginning but is useless long-term.

Yep exactly. Still not sure how/why it went wrong or what he tried to do differently (whether he did at all), but not many excuses can be made. The injury situation was building up, but we'd suffered through that for a lot of the campaign already. Obviously the off the field issues don't help, but he was proving he could do it at the start of the campaign, so it shouldn't have dropped like it did.

It’s adrenaline/momentum. As soon as that ran out, he was done for. It’s happened twice now and he really shouldn’t be getting another job in football

[YorkshireRoyal99]

We didn't win in how many games? After the start we had, there's little excuse for that. He lost the dressing room and paid the ultimate price. He's one of those managers who gets a bounce at the beginning but is useless long-term.

Yep exactly. Still not sure how/why it went wrong or what he tried to do differently (whether he did at all), but not many excuses can be made. The injury situation was building up, but we'd suffered through that for a lot of the campaign already. Obviously the off the field issues don't help, but he was proving he could do it at the start of the campaign, so it shouldn't have dropped like it did.

It’s adrenaline/momentum. As soon as that ran out, he was done for. It’s happened twice now and he really shouldn’t be getting another job in football

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

[CountryRoyal]

Yep exactly. Still not sure how/why it went wrong or what he tried to do differently (whether he did at all), but not many excuses can be made. The injury situation was building up, but we'd suffered through that for a lot of the campaign already. Obviously the off the field issues don't help, but he was proving he could do it at the start of the campaign, so it shouldn't have dropped like it did.

It’s adrenaline/momentum. As soon as that ran out, he was done for. It’s happened twice now and he really shouldn’t be getting another job in football

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

I’m sure it didn’t help constantly and publicly saying how crap we were as we were actually playing quite well.

[Snowball]

Also posted in the R&G section, Reading manager's records since Mark McGhee arrived in May 1991 (in order of win ratio):

Pos Name - Win Ratio % - Loss Ratio %

1. Alan Pardew - 48.3 - 27.4
2. Brian McDermott (1) - 45.0 - 29.6
3. Steve Coppell - 44.3 - 31.6
4. Mark McGhee - 43.2 - 29.0
5. Jaap Stam - 40.8 - 35.7
6. Mark Bowen - 37.2 - 34.8
7. Nigel Adkins - 36.3 - 38.8
8. Quinn/Gooding - 35.8 - 36.6
9. Steve Clarke - 35.8 - 37.7
10. Veljko Paunovic - 34.9 - 43.3
11. Terry Bullivant - 32.0 - 40.0
12. Paul Ince - 31.0 - 50.0
13. Brian McDermott (2) - 30.0 - 43.3
14. Tommy Burns - 29.4 - 44.1
15. Brendan Rodgers - 26.1 - 47.8
16. Jose Gomes - 23.6 - 39.5
17. Paul Clement - 23.3 - 50.0

Congratulations to Mr Ince and Mr Clement in reaching the magic 50% ratio.

Conclusion - don't appoint managers with the first name of Paul.

I did a quick check imagining 100 games per manager
awarding 3 points for the win, and calculating the number
of draws, then getting a total for "100 games", then seeing
how the ppl would work out for 46 games.

So pardew (48.3 - 27.4) got 145 points for wins
and 24/100 (100-48.3-27.4) draws so finished on 169 points
which would have meant a 78 point season (46 games)

Coppell and McDermott had Premiership seasons to drag their scores down.




145+25 Pardew 1.7 78
135+25 McDermott-1 1.6 74
133+25 Coppell 1.58 73
130+28 McGhee 1.58 73
=========================
123+23 Stam 1.46 67
118+28 Quin-Gooding 1.46 67
112+28 Bowen 1.4 64
109+25 Adkins 1.34 62
107+26 Clarke 1.33 61
105+22 Paunovic 1.27 58
96+24 Bullivant 1.2 55
90+27 McDermott-2 1.17 54
88+27 Burns 1.15 53
93+19 INCE 1.12 52
=================================
71+34 Gomes 1.05 48
78+26 Rodgers 1.04 48
70+27 Clement 0.97 45

[Elm Park Kid]

I mean - those types of raw statistics obviously don't take into account the situation that any of those managers found themselves in. Managing an almost a new squad pulled together under strict EFL requirements is a bit different than operating in a time when we were buying £7.5m forwards just to show off.

Ultimately I have to accept that PInce deserved to lose his job as we went rapidly backwards in the new year. The points deduction seemed to derail us psychologically, and it was his responsibility to make sure that didn't happen. Whatever else you can say about PInce, he wasn't the right man to deal with that situation and, if anything, sounds like he made it worse.

But i'm not interested in PInce bashing. He's not responsible for our relegation - not being good enough to pull us out of the shit our owners put is in is really not that much of a criticism. And lets not forget that we very likely stay up with him without the points deduction, he would have achieved the singular target we gave him at the start.

[AthleticoSpizz]

I mean - those types of raw statistics obviously don't take into account the situation that any of those managers found themselves in. Managing an almost a new squad pulled together under strict EFL requirements is a bit different than operating in a time when we were buying £7.5m forwards just to show off.

Ultimately I have to accept that PInce deserved to lose his job as we went rapidly backwards in the new year. The points deduction seemed to derail us psychologically, and it was his responsibility to make sure that didn't happen. Whatever else you can say about PInce, he wasn't the right man to deal with that situation and, if anything, sounds like he made it worse.

But i'm not interested in PInce bashing. He's not responsible for our relegation - not being good enough to pull us out of the shit our owners put is in is really not that much of a criticism. And lets not forget that we very likely stay up with him without the points deduction, he would have achieved the singular target we gave him at the start.

….and he probably would’ve left anyway….yep, agree the Pince bashing (‘justified* or not) should be consigned to history already…this time last year (and a long time after that) we* were all speaking differently of him. Made some decent acquisitions under the circumstances and was let down by some…and some were let down by him.

Was never a long-term arrangement.

[Snowflake Royal]

Chief Ince sympathiser Yorkshire Royal strikes again.

Swiftly becoming chief apologist for the club.q

[Snowflake Royal]

Yep exactly. Still not sure how/why it went wrong or what he tried to do differently (whether he did at all), but not many excuses can be made. The injury situation was building up, but we'd suffered through that for a lot of the campaign already. Obviously the off the field issues don't help, but he was proving he could do it at the start of the campaign, so it shouldn't have dropped like it did.

It’s adrenaline/momentum. As soon as that ran out, he was done for. It’s happened twice now and he really shouldn’t be getting another job in football

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

He knew what other people had done wrong (not hard). Couldn’t admit anything from him was ought but perfect

[YorkshireRoyal99]

It’s adrenaline/momentum. As soon as that ran out, he was done for. It’s happened twice now and he really shouldn’t be getting another job in football

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

He knew what other people had done wrong (not hard). Couldn’t admit anything from him was ought but perfect

Each to their own, but we all know how you get when you don't like someone/something, you'll never admit any good work done. Either way, point still stands that myself (and some others) have made, partly to blame, but not solely to blame and other errors, which he had no impact on, cost him as well as his own mistakes. But I suppose you can keep listening to OMA, I guess.

[NathStPaul]

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

He knew what other people had done wrong (not hard). Couldn’t admit anything from him was ought but perfect

Each to their own, but we all know how you get when you don't like someone/something, you'll never admit any good work done. Either way, point still stands that myself (and some others) have made, partly to blame, but not solely to blame and other errors, which he had no impact on, cost him as well as his own mistakes. But I suppose you can keep listening to OMA, I guess.

Or everyone can just read the actual words you type out.

You repeatedly take contrary opinions in order to garner reactions, you don't actually believe the things you say.

[Rax]

Also posted in the R&G section, Reading manager's records since Mark McGhee arrived in May 1991 (in order of win ratio):

Pos Name - Win Ratio % - Loss Ratio %

1. Alan Pardew - 48.3 - 27.4
2. Brian McDermott (1) - 45.0 - 29.6
3. Steve Coppell - 44.3 - 31.6
4. Mark McGhee - 43.2 - 29.0
5. Jaap Stam - 40.8 - 35.7
6. Mark Bowen - 37.2 - 34.8
7. Nigel Adkins - 36.3 - 38.8
8. Quinn/Gooding - 35.8 - 36.6
9. Steve Clarke - 35.8 - 37.7
10. Veljko Paunovic - 34.9 - 43.3
11. Terry Bullivant - 32.0 - 40.0
12. Paul Ince - 31.0 - 50.0
13. Brian McDermott (2) - 30.0 - 43.3
14. Tommy Burns - 29.4 - 44.1
15. Brendan Rodgers - 26.1 - 47.8
16. Jose Gomes - 23.6 - 39.5
17. Paul Clement - 23.3 - 50.0

Congratulations to Mr Ince and Mr Clement in reaching the magic 50% ratio.

Conclusion - don't appoint managers with the first name of Paul.

I did a quick check imagining 100 games per manager
awarding 3 points for the win, and calculating the number
of draws, then getting a total for "100 games", then seeing
how the ppl would work out for 46 games.

So pardew (48.3 - 27.4) got 145 points for wins
and 24/100 (100-48.3-27.4) draws so finished on 169 points
which would have meant a 78 point season (46 games)

Coppell and McDermott had Premiership seasons to drag their scores down.




145+25 Pardew 1.7 78
135+25 McDermott-1 1.6 74
133+25 Coppell 1.58 73
130+28 McGhee 1.58 73
=========================
123+23 Stam 1.46 67
118+28 Quin-Gooding 1.46 67
112+28 Bowen 1.4 64
109+25 Adkins 1.34 62
107+26 Clarke 1.33 61
105+22 Paunovic 1.27 58
96+24 Bullivant 1.2 55
90+27 McDermott-2 1.17 54
88+27 Burns 1.15 53
93+19 INCE 1.12 52
=================================
71+34 Gomes 1.05 48
78+26 Rodgers 1.04 48
70+27 Clement 0.97 45

I'm amazed Terry the Taxi fared so well - that season was spectacularly s**t!

[Sutekh]

Also posted in the R&G section, Reading manager's records since Mark McGhee arrived in May 1991 (in order of win ratio):

Pos Name - Win Ratio % - Loss Ratio %

1. Alan Pardew - 48.3 - 27.4
2. Brian McDermott (1) - 45.0 - 29.6
3. Steve Coppell - 44.3 - 31.6
4. Mark McGhee - 43.2 - 29.0
5. Jaap Stam - 40.8 - 35.7
6. Mark Bowen - 37.2 - 34.8
7. Nigel Adkins - 36.3 - 38.8
8. Quinn/Gooding - 35.8 - 36.6
9. Steve Clarke - 35.8 - 37.7
10. Veljko Paunovic - 34.9 - 43.3
11. Terry Bullivant - 32.0 - 40.0
12. Paul Ince - 31.0 - 50.0
13. Brian McDermott (2) - 30.0 - 43.3
14. Tommy Burns - 29.4 - 44.1
15. Brendan Rodgers - 26.1 - 47.8
16. Jose Gomes - 23.6 - 39.5
17. Paul Clement - 23.3 - 50.0

Congratulations to Mr Ince and Mr Clement in reaching the magic 50% ratio.

Conclusion - don't appoint managers with the first name of Paul.

I'm amazed Terry the Taxi fared so well - that season was spectacularly s**t!

Ince was worse than Bullivant but I'm not sure it actually felt like it!

And the other obvious fact is that Reading don't spend well when spending big, those pesky Chinese/Thai owners you might say but it was the exact same thing even under SJM as Burns seemed to try and sign anyone who looked like they might be able to kick a ball but he is also one of the worst ever managerial incumbents!

Alan Pardew had the right approach with player investment, spent big when the right option was available that would fit in with the system, but also found several underrated gems for not all that much.

Next fact of the bleedin' obvious - dont buy players when you don't have an established plan/system/style/clue. You have to define a plan/system/style/clue first and for that you need a manager people can trust (and i include a good proportion of a fanbase in that) from the getgo.

[under the tin]

Also posted in the R&G section, Reading manager's records since Mark McGhee arrived in May 1991 (in order of win ratio):

Pos Name - Win Ratio % - Loss Ratio %

1. Alan Pardew - 48.3 - 27.4
2. Brian McDermott (1) - 45.0 - 29.6
3. Steve Coppell - 44.3 - 31.6
4. Mark McGhee - 43.2 - 29.0
5. Jaap Stam - 40.8 - 35.7
6. Mark Bowen - 37.2 - 34.8
7. Nigel Adkins - 36.3 - 38.8
8. Quinn/Gooding - 35.8 - 36.6
9. Steve Clarke - 35.8 - 37.7
10. Veljko Paunovic - 34.9 - 43.3
11. Terry Bullivant - 32.0 - 40.0
12. Paul Ince - 31.0 - 50.0
13. Brian McDermott (2) - 30.0 - 43.3
14. Tommy Burns - 29.4 - 44.1
15. Brendan Rodgers - 26.1 - 47.8
16. Jose Gomes - 23.6 - 39.5
17. Paul Clement - 23.3 - 50.0

Congratulations to Mr Ince and Mr Clement in reaching the magic 50% ratio.

Conclusion - don't appoint managers with the first name of Paul.

I'm amazed Terry the Taxi fared so well - that season was spectacularly s**t!

Ince was worse than Bullivant but I'm not sure it actually felt like it!

And the other obvious fact is that Reading don't spend well when spending big, those pesky Chinese/Thai owners you might say but it was the exact same thing even under SJM as Burns seemed to try and sign anyone who looked like they might be able to kick a ball but he is also one of the worst ever managerial incumbents!

Alan Pardew had the right approach with player investment, spent big when the right option was available that would fit in with the system, but also found several underrated gems for not all that much.

Next fact of the bleedin' obvious - dont buy players when you don't have an established plan/system/style/clue. You have to define a plan/system/style/clue first and for that you need a manager people can trust (and i include a good proportion of a fanbase in that) from the getgo.

Amen.
For me, I just look at the Coppell 106 side.
By record, the best RFC side ever. 8th in the PL.
Then, with agents whispering in our players ears, and bigger clubs sniffing round, slowly the side was dismantled, earning previously unheard of incoming transfer fees.
Without wishing to sound disrespectful to the departing players, many of the purchasing clubs found out that RFC side were not only about talented players, but about everyone in that side knowing their job, the very important team/squad unity and attitude to work, under the direction of a solid, calm, respected management and scouting team.
The whole was more than the sum of the parts.

[From Despair To Where?]

I remember a post match interview with Ian Holloway after we won 2-1 at Loftus Rd in the 106 season. He said something along the lines of "we scouted them and the scout came back and said something I've never heard before. This team has no weaknesses, pray they have an off day. They had an off day and still won"

[Snowflake Royal]

Yeah possibly/probably momentum. It was a shame really as he seemed to know what was required and looked as if he tried to put things in place at first. Maybe a job upstairs in a Bowen-type role somewhere, I don't know.

He knew what other people had done wrong (not hard). Couldn’t admit anything from him was ought but perfect

Each to their own, but we all know how you get when you don't like someone/something, you'll never admit any good work done. Either way, point still stands that myself (and some others) have made, partly to blame, but not solely to blame and other errors, which he had no impact on, cost him as well as his own mistakes. But I suppose you can keep listening to OMA, I guess.

Absolute nonsense.

I'm just not interested in defending and excusing someone who did badly overall and in the end with their few early successes. So what. Recency is what matters.

You're always making excuses and talking a whole load of waffle.