I've had a stab at looking at the idea of a honeymoon period. I'm not really satisfied with it, but I think I've probably got to the end of the line with it (for me at least).
Method: I've discarded any managers who didn't have at least 15 matches in charge. For those that did, I have two measures. Firstly, how did they get on in their first game; win, lose or draw. Secondly how did their first five and first ten matches compare to their overall season. I calculated the number of points won from the number possible and recorded this as a fraction. Cells in red indicate where a team took less than 33.4% of the points available; amber between 33.4% and 66.6%; green is more than 66.7%.
Findings & Critique: On the first measure I was surprised that the number of first matches won (8) was less than the number lost (11). Perhaps this shouldn't be a surprise as teams often change managers when they are struggling. It just didn't seem to fit with my experience, but then, perhaps not all managers are lucky enough to play against Charlton first time out. On the second measure, a quick look at the table shows that there are more green cells for the first five matches than for the first ten matches, and more for the first ten than for all matches. You might think this means that teams are winning more under new management. I'm not convinced though. There's a similar pattern for the red cells as well. I suspect that it just means that in a smaller sample, one odd result has a greater impact on the overall pattern than in a larger sample. Sadly, I don't have anyway of testing for significance with my methodology. The three points for a win system isn't helpful for these stats as it makes draws less worthy, although in reality a team that's been taking beating might be very glad to get a draw or two that stops the rot. I did consider other methods; counting wins or perhaps percentiles of points over time. But frankly these seemed to complicated. I'm not sure we can really conclude anything from these results about a Honeymoon period. Maybe there's something there, but maybe we just notice early wins because we're looking out for them. There are some lessons from this though: 1. Eddie Howe and Bournemouth are a match made in heaven. 2. Dean Saunders and Wolves and Guy Whittingham and Pompey are matches made in hell. 3. It's time I got a life.
Once again, fantastic bit of research and analysis. But I'm worried you may have too much spare time on your hands. Perhaps you need a hobby, such as following a local sports team.
I said prior to the start of the season that I thought we'd have a season long relegation fight but also that we would survive due to CP"s man management skills and I still strongly believe that. Next season however might be a different story, with no new investment and the fire sale of our younger talent and our better players, I would expect relegation as a nigh on certainty, this in no way would be down to CP. CP has my undying support and if those 2 clowns were to sack him then they would have seriously underestimated the wrath of us supporters.
I congratulate Stig on an excellent piece of work. It must have been very time consuming.
I would always like to think of myself as being 100% behind the manager but, having said that, there have been one or two specific instances of late which have caused not only me, but many others, to question his judgement. I am referring initially to the decision of play Evina on the left of midfield at the away game at Reading and then, last Saturday, to play Pritchard behind Kermogant at home to Derby. Both decisions were quite evidently misjudged and this was apparent at a very early stage of each game. However, nothing was done to rectify this until midway through the second half in each case. What is more disconcerting is that CP was quoted as saying that, last Saturday, "we got our tactics right"! Is it any wonder that a great number of people have now started to question his ability?
Although there is no question that CP has worked wonders on very limited resources, the fine tuning of those resources will be the difference between whether we are playing in the Championship or League One next season.
Wow - great analysis Stig. Just goes to show that these things are never straightforward and that you can end up in a worse situation rather than things improving... I honestly think that that would be the case if CP were to leave the club, but that's just my opinion.
I congratulate Stig on an excellent piece of work. It must have been very time consuming.
I would always like to think of myself as being 100% behind the manager but, having said that, there have been one or two specific instances of late which have caused not only me, but many others, to question his judgement. I am referring initially to the decision of play Evina on the left of midfield at the away game at Reading and then, last Saturday, to play Pritchard behind Kermogant at home to Derby. Both decisions were quite evidently misjudged and this was apparent at a very early stage of each game. However, nothing was done to rectify this until midway through the second half in each case. What is more disconcerting is that CP was quoted as saying that, last Saturday, "we got our tactics right"! Is it any wonder that a great number of people have now started to question his ability?
Although there is no question that CP has worked wonders on very limited resources, the fine tuning of those resources will be the difference between whether we are playing in the Championship or League One next season.
Several on here have called for Evina to be given a go at left midfield over the last year or so. Considering our options in that position you can understand him giving him a game there. How long do you give a player before taking them off? What's it going to do to a players confidence if he's played out of position and taken him off at half time?
On Pritchard as I've said before he played the same role away at Brighton last season, where we got a 0-0 draw, and either team might have sneaked a 1-0 win. It was to stop Derby passing their way through us. The idea was obviously to keep it tight and hopefully nick a goal. It's often said Pritchard offers nothing going forward but he also set up a lot of goals last season. I could understand the thinking at the time, even if it is a very defensive way of playing.
We're not getting results so Powell's trying different options. I doubt we'll see either Evina or Pritchard play in those positions again. If we had an obvious best team he should probably stick to it, but we have too many unreliable/inconsistent players.
I've read a few times some would be happier to see us attack teams and have some shots even if we lose 3 or 4-0. Not sure I really believe that, if that happens it'll be "it's time for Powell to go".
Comments
Method: I've discarded any managers who didn't have at least 15 matches in charge. For those that did, I have two measures. Firstly, how did they get on in their first game; win, lose or draw. Secondly how did their first five and first ten matches compare to their overall season. I calculated the number of points won from the number possible and recorded this as a fraction. Cells in red indicate where a team took less than 33.4% of the points available; amber between 33.4% and 66.6%; green is more than 66.7%.
Findings & Critique: On the first measure I was surprised that the number of first matches won (8) was less than the number lost (11). Perhaps this shouldn't be a surprise as teams often change managers when they are struggling. It just didn't seem to fit with my experience, but then, perhaps not all managers are lucky enough to play against Charlton first time out. On the second measure, a quick look at the table shows that there are more green cells for the first five matches than for the first ten matches, and more for the first ten than for all matches. You might think this means that teams are winning more under new management. I'm not convinced though. There's a similar pattern for the red cells as well. I suspect that it just means that in a smaller sample, one odd result has a greater impact on the overall pattern than in a larger sample. Sadly, I don't have anyway of testing for significance with my methodology. The three points for a win system isn't helpful for these stats as it makes draws less worthy, although in reality a team that's been taking beating might be very glad to get a draw or two that stops the rot. I did consider other methods; counting wins or perhaps percentiles of points over time. But frankly these seemed to complicated. I'm not sure we can really conclude anything from these results about a Honeymoon period. Maybe there's something there, but maybe we just notice early wins because we're looking out for them. There are some lessons from this though:
1. Eddie Howe and Bournemouth are a match made in heaven.
2. Dean Saunders and Wolves and Guy Whittingham and Pompey are matches made in hell.
3. It's time I got a life.
Next season however might be a different story, with no new investment and the fire sale of our younger talent and our better players, I would expect relegation as a nigh on certainty, this in no way would be down to CP.
CP has my undying support and if those 2 clowns were to sack him then they would have seriously underestimated the wrath of us supporters.
I would always like to think of myself as being 100% behind the manager but, having said that, there have been one or two specific instances of late which have caused not only me, but many others, to question his judgement.
I am referring initially to the decision of play Evina on the left of midfield at the away game at Reading and then, last Saturday, to play Pritchard behind Kermogant at home to Derby. Both decisions were quite evidently misjudged and this was apparent at a very early stage of each game. However, nothing was done to rectify this until midway through the second half in each case.
What is more disconcerting is that CP was quoted as saying that, last Saturday, "we got our tactics right"!
Is it any wonder that a great number of people have now started to question his ability?
Although there is no question that CP has worked wonders on very limited resources, the fine tuning of those resources will be the difference between whether we are playing in the Championship or League One next season.
On Pritchard as I've said before he played the same role away at Brighton last season, where we got a 0-0 draw, and either team might have sneaked a 1-0 win. It was to stop Derby passing their way through us. The idea was obviously to keep it tight and hopefully nick a goal. It's often said Pritchard offers nothing going forward but he also set up a lot of goals last season. I could understand the thinking at the time, even if it is a very defensive way of playing.
We're not getting results so Powell's trying different options. I doubt we'll see either Evina or Pritchard play in those positions again. If we had an obvious best team he should probably stick to it, but we have too many unreliable/inconsistent players.
I've read a few times some would be happier to see us attack teams and have some shots even if we lose 3 or 4-0. Not sure I really believe that, if that happens it'll be "it's time for Powell to go".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_English_Football_League_managers