https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66176946 Very long article to say it’s 50/50… It’s almost as if it depends on the manager you employ!
I think we all could! Who would have thought replacing Graham Potter with Frank Lampard would be detrimental tho the points per game stat!
The chances on improvement rest on how bad the incumbent actually was and how good the new manager is. However as I've stated before, most manager don't make a difference either way and the long-term results corelate to relative wage expenditure compared to your competitors. Short-term blips can be achieved of course and some managers *do* overachieve longer-term - and others do underachieve but its a surprisingly small number either way. Simple this club ownership innit? Just spend as much money as possible on wages comparted to your rivals and generally you'll finish higher then them.
I thought it was interesting when we sacked Schopp because the football had started to improve just before he got the chop. I'd have rather kept him on than get Asbaghi. Who turned out to be too defensive. Hindsight is a wonderful thing though. We always look to the Wilders and Warnock's of this world when in a crisis yet the board as long as I can remember have always gone left field even before these guys.
Schopp was just awful - seems we didn't allow him to bring in his right hand man who actually knew how to organise a press, problem was we replaced him with a PE teacher who was even worse.
Yeah I know they were both crap but I thought we were less crap under Schopp. His football was marginally better.
How much did the loathsome Conway stick his nose in when we had Schopp ?. Telling him to change the style of football, because what had just happened in the Play off season wasn't good enough financially etc. Asbaghi kind of got it right to begin with, sorting the defence out and making us harder to beat. And I thought we were going to stay up after that run of wins in Feb/Mar. But it all came to a halt after failing to win the 6 pointer against Reading.